quickly walk away from it, what is not normal. that we only have so many law enforcement people. we have a guy in times where the waterway and there may be a normal explanation for it. i get on the metra system and by putting my earphones and a listen to my music or whatever when that is probably not a very smart thing, particularly for a guy like me to do. but it is just being aware -- you know, it is so easy. when i went to vietnam ever went said, stay alert, stay alive. i think people will be a little bit more alert right now, but just look for things that are out of place. is an author.t is ned zsa,ler

republican. 'd think throrism comes at all different forms and different faces, not just literally, but metaphorically, too. you cannot say that it is not political or that it is. it is hard to label active terrorism -- acts of terrorism sometimes providing it is up to with identifying terrorism. we sometimes let our guard down and i feel like we do not know when the time is to act. when something should be under suspicion. we wait for something to happen. tough one. is a you are standing in an airport

and you see someone sat down a heavy briefcase and a walk away. are they walking away 5 feet to address something in the trash can? or are they actually walking away? have they forgotten that there? there's always hesitation to do that. but in countries where they have a lot more terrorism than we do -- israel is one that comes to mind -- they prevent so many acts of terrorism every year because of an alert citizenry. you go to the beach in israel and you leave a big bag and start walking away, it will not sit there unattended for a very long time. and unfortunately,ecause the have had so many as of terrorism. we are a bit relaxed here in the u.s. because we have been so fortunate that we've had so few acts of terrorism. i hope it remains that way. host: we have seen on nbc news and twitter the fbi has released the remaining photographs of the remaining boston suspect.

guest: that is a very clear photograph. it is interesting, he is 19. wassume his brother probably the mastermind of this. and on his face the county says he has no friends. i think this should be a pretty quick apprehension. host: the two men that have been searched for, one has died someone traded in and talks about that we are talking about chechnya and as terrorists. they say that is shortsighted and wrong. guest: in civil wars, there are terrible things that go on that are back on both sides. most americans when you think of think ofand, you terrorist attacks.

civil wars are terrible things, where are the -- wheth we're talk aur civil war here in america or wherever it may be. but clearly, there has been serious abuse on both sides. it is not chechnya or muslim or christian or catholic or whenever. it is people that commit acts of terrorism host: colonel randall larsen of the institute of homeland security. -- is on on skarupa our line. caller: what about the parents of the suspect? is understand it came back in 2002 with the family. where is the family? have the authorities contacted the family? will we be seeing the family soon? guest: that is a good question. i was not aware of that. if their parents are here, i'm sure that they have been contacted by law enforcement

now. and it is a very good question, were they involved in protecting the people since the attack? i'm sure the law enforcement people are hot on the trail. caller: are you still with us, george? -- host: george, are you still with us? caller: yes, they said that he came back with his father in 2002. host: tell us what you want to know more about the family and why are you making that connection? caller: it is like in the new town tragedy, the young man who did indeed, tcoacd the father and they got the father's reaction. host: here is what we're seeing on twitter. is aas reported that there third person of interest that is a relative of the two brothers. we are following what is going on on twitter. you can give us your thoughts d wereou qstions

and comments on the air. our next caller is from corpus christi, texas, republican line. hi, arthur. things -- when things get ambiguous i look to the dictionary. i looked up terrorism in the .ebster college dictionary it simply says the use of violence as a political instrument or a time of such violence. in america these days, everything seems so ambiguous and people, especially the news, are so apt to turn stories into soap operas. i can literally watch three different tv stations and get three different stories. with the scene different newscasters and

getting different stories, but i think you have put your finger on what we are trying to stay thougertain tax -- certairorize us some kid gets sin street and that terrorizes me because i live here. but that definition in webster has a connection to all legal definitions in that it is a political act. and generally, a political act against noncombatants. one military unit shoots another military unit. that is regular warfare. but when you intentionally attacked civilians for a political purpose, i think everybody agrees that was terrorism we have several elements here in boston. what we do not yet know is whether there was a political purpose. we are assuming there was, but we do not know they're wet -- that for a fact yet. host: someone on twitter reminds us that it was a pressure

cooker believed to contain the bomb. likean see what this looks in the new york daily news. what is significant about this to you as we talk about such an easily homemade, crude instrument. guest: ball bearings, nails, pressure kircher ramallah -- pressure cooker, items you can go by this afternoon. look at what timothy mcveigh used, diesel fuel and fertilizer. there is nothing we can do to keep these sort of weapons out of hands of people. look at what is taking place in west, texas right now. one of the large explosions in america and it was a fertilizer storage plant. that is one of the serious problems face. also, will we get back to the biocide of it, the pathogens are available and the equipment you need to make a weapon now you can buy on the internet

completely legally. i do not care if we're talking about bombs or buy weapons, they are available. weapons, theyal are available. host: the department of homeland security bulletins in 2004 and in 2010 outlining their frequent use in afghanistan and india, nepal, and pakistan. while not commonly deployed in the u.s., one of the devices recovered in the attempted car bombing in york city's times square inc. a pressure cooker along with fireworks according to the 2010 dhs bulletin. we have had warnings of this before. guest: absolutely. but how many people by pressure cookers? very very common thing that you can buy in the store. tuesday that this person bought sthat lus tw. insas, which is what timothy mcveigh did.

host: carroll is on the line. i have three questions. what exactly is ricin? where does it come from? and within the man who said that in the mail be considered a terrorist -- within the man who said that in the mail be considered a terrorist because it was against two political figures? whaty third question is, are i have three questions. what exactly is his connectionss he connected with it? it is like we do not care about that. guest: there are too many stories going on. there has been somebody arrested. i do not know he's guilty or not ricin comes from castor beans. another thing we are talking , not very difficult to get a hold of. it is extracted. it is a pretty simple chemical process. any high school chemistry lab would allow you to do it. when the soviet union had

offensive biowarfare problems, we decided that rights and was not an effective way to spray in the air and kill a bunch of people. if i put it under your sn, it ki you.ssination and it will that it isuaidsa not only a terrorist, but he used what the fbi is going to call a weapon of mass destruction. the penalty for that if convicted, he will probably never see the outside of a prison. and the third question was, what was his connection? i do not know who mailed it. somebody has been arrested. the guy who has been arrested is from the same hometown as the senator who got it. but sending something to the president with the intent to mark, or a member of congress, it is a serious crime. -- with the intent to harm, or a

member of congress, it is a serious crime. host: this is from the u.s. news. a win in akron, ohio, independent. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a quick question. this deals with the high would consider to be a terrorist and i think you would, too, shaikh amarah. why do the universities today -- guevara.

why do the universities today and young people make him an icon? guest: some people like to see that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and i have never agreed with that line, so frankly, i cannot answer your question. it is a good question. young people who know nothing about certain subjects friday cool to wear a t-shirt. -- find it cool to wear a t- shirt. host: let's go to the next call, republican, hi, nick. good morning. somebody mentions there'simmigrants, nothing it off. they're coming here to work. really? who knows that? and besides that, they're breaking the law. that is all right, they're coming here to work.

but nobody knows what kind of people they are. and nobody knows how many there are in this country. everyone keeps mentioning 11 million. how do they know? host: let's leave it there. guest: in an hour or so before i came on, talking about immigration is an extraordinarily complex problem and it is not an area i'm an expert on. but where i have looked at it is the fact that -- this is just randy larsen's opinion and i've been working in the field of homeland security since 1994. the vast majority of people who come to america want to come here to have a better life. all the problems that we have in america, and we certainly have our fair share, it is still a better place to be than any place i've ever been. i have traveled all over the world. people will stand outside our embassies and they are protesting and then they will get in line and get a visa to come here. whether it is illegal or legal,

people want to come to america. the vast majority want to come here for a better life we have to have some legislation and hopefully have some legislation to fix our immigration problem that we have now. it will t be aeasyix and ilovnight, b ido not think you should looa it a ay iue. those 19 hijackers on 9/11, had we had a perfect immigration system, high fences on our borders, someone who is willing to hijack an airplane and fly into a building will not be deterred by a border guard or a fence or something. the best way to fight terrorism is to kill them overseas before they get here. i think president obama has been doing a pretty good job of that in the past few years. immigration is a very complex issue. that is my basic take on that. the: colonel larsen, one of earlier caller talked about the

family of the suspect. the ap said it talk to the father of the two young men. the father of the suspects in the boston marathon bombing said his son on a list is a smart and accomplished young man. smart on the loose is a and accomplished young man. that is from the associated press, who reached the father of the two suspects in russia. call is from it in maryland. would like to i thank the colonel for his

service. i wanted to ask the -- asking a question concerning terrorism and its definition. i believe political terrorism, of course, is widely known and accepted. but there is also secular terrorism, as shown in bosnia, alsoxample, and probably institutionalized care as we experienced in nazi germany and bosnia recently. i would like your comments on that. guest: i have been doing some work with survivors of the siege and the sort of terrorism there, the rape camps that were set up against bosnian where 8000genocide men and boys were killed beyond my comprehension.thais we have not seen anything like that any western country since

1945. clearly, not to germany. we ought -- nazi germany. and when i was a young boy, there is terrorism in the united states. if you were black and you live in mississippi, you were terrorized. it was political terrorism and it was institutionalized terrorism the state-sponsored segregation that took place. if you have not seen a more elite -- the movie 42, go see the movie 42. it is important that young children who have never seen what that is like see that and try to understand what that was like. do we still have racism in the united states today? yes, we do, but thank god we do not have institutionalized racism. host: retired colonel prendo larsen -- randall l. larsen from the institute of the homeland security.

suspects and we see their names. killed byr-old was police. fox news says they have been living in the u.s. for a decade. we are watching your tweets as well as you share your questions and comments for our guest, colonel garson pippert -- colonel larsen. hi, steve. ask theif i could colonel to comment on why, and if he believes that 90% of terrorism in the world today is done by muslim extremists. guest: steve, i do not have the numbers. i know for a while people used

to think that the suicide bombers all came out of the middle east. actually, it came out of shora laska if you just look at raw numbers -- sri lanka it you just look at raw numbers. if you look in the last two decades and with the taking of our hostages in the embassy in tehran, you'll see a lot of people that come from that culture. i will also tell you that many of the hijackers on 9/11 spent the night before and strip bars drinking. friends have any of my derth i gooims that go to strip bars and get intoxicated. sometimes we confuse culture with religion. america when they think about muslims they think of saudi arabia where the women have to wear all of this stuff

like in certain parts of afghanistan, and that women cannot drive or be out of public by themselves or whatever. then you go to bosnia where the muslim-led women dressed just like we do and have all the same rights that we do. in fact, the bosnians fight it odd that women could not vote in america until the last century. the muslim people that you find there are totally different the largest muslim nation in the world is indonesia. and the second largest is india. the first time i went to indonesia i was flying in large airports airplane and i told my crew i did not know much about it. it is the largest muslim nation in the world, so we will be drinking it -- drinking indeeanr or eating in a portrait when we got there, they were handing as beer and giving us a food with pork in it.

muslim, i say, i'm a guess you could say i'm a christian because i was raising a christian community and whatever, but i do not regularly go to church. am i still th w the coal strike came from. -- that was a cultured i came from. and you see these guys, their houses were filled with pornographic material. none of my muslim friends would have pornographic material. i think we would confuse religion with culture. host: you can see here the latest pictures that authorities have. the 19 year-old is being searched for. reports in the city lockston, the city is in down mode. schools are closed and a lot of universities have canceled classes today and mass transit

has also suspended service. we're asking you to react to this story as it is developing in the news, and also share your questions and comments about terrorism generally with our guests, colonel randall larsen. stanford, kentucky, william on the republican line. question ande one then i will hang out. -- hang up. about the pressure cooker that they use for the bonds, i have been using pressure cookers to carry some for 35 years. what size pressure cookers with they have had to use to fit in those backpacks? host: before you go, can i ask you a question? caller: yes. back in 2004 and in

2010, the department of homeland security put out warnings warning that pressure cookers could be used in attacks because they had been used abroad. as someone who has used a pressure cooker for practical purposes, do you think that people should have to have a special system of checks to buy something like that? what can you do? caller: i don't really know. i was wondering about that myself i live in a rural area and i have three of them. gardenhem to can my vegetables. i've actually had one, one of the older type models that did not have a pressure release valve on it and actually exploded a blue stuff up in the kitcn. -- big blue stuff up in the kitchen. stuff up in the

kitchen. if i go to buy one, am i going to have to fill out a form like you would r a gun to get a pressure cooker sork sy garden vegetables for the winter? host: let's hear f laen guest: i have not seen a pressure burgers cents -- a pressure cooker since my mom and remedies to canned vegetables. i understand there are more entrenched now and the great cooks are using them again. mort in trend now and the great cooks are using them again. it would fit in a large backpack. i do not think there will be a way to control pressure cookers. there are other things that you can use to seal it. the key is that you have to have that tight seal to turn that fire into an explosion. host: where do you go from here in terms of regulation?

a lot of our reactions have been reactionary. regulations regarding removing shoes at airports, liquids and so forth her how you deal with that reactionary policy? in the book i talk about the super reactions that have wasted lots of money, billions, and made our families know more secure. we're spending money where we should not instead of where we should. like you said, we go from shoes and then we go to liquids and i was afraid they would start looking at our underwear after the tender where bomber. -- the underwear bomber. i'm more interested in looking unear.ple's eyes instead of we have a lot of videotape of suicide bombers on their way to a final mission. and we know certain behavior's

to look for in those people. some are kind of obvious and others are not obvious at all. i think we have to focus by staying ahead of the curve by focusing on those things that give us a great return on investment. we have not caught a bomber at an airport enroute to do a bomb. but we have caught a lot of money smugglers and drug dealers because it is called spots. surveillance of passengers to observational techniques. you do not notice the people at the airport because they are in civilian clothing and they're watching. i know there's a big controversy now. can you carry short knives and knitting needles on airplanes? i think tsa did a terrible job of coordinating that with the flight union before hand. they should have sat down and communicated. they did not. but i agree that i want them focused on bombers, not to mention lives.

-- two inch knives. host: you have to band ball bearings, bbs, nails, since they were used, too. --'s hear from maryland in from maryland, a democrat. on an: i'm calling earlier call when someone asked what can we do. i was at the mall when i noticed 3 delmon and i happen to hear some of their conversation and there were moving from department to department. they seemed to be looking for plastic items. at one point, somebody directed them to a local chain where they may be able to get a large amount of plastic chairs. i went to security and i asked them to please focus their cameras on these three gentlemen. it was getting very close to closing time. i left the mall and called the

fbi, feeling very ridiculous that i was doing this. they could not have been more pride. i asked security to put on the cameras and a survey asking me what they look like. and they assured me that i had done the right thing and that they would be out there to investigate it. it your feeling that maybe you're going to be stupid, be stupid and be right. give the fbi something to work with. guest: igratulatou for that. i remember one of my favorite stories wasbout six mon ter 9/11, a couple of concerned citizens called the fbi office and get this city and said, ok, there were these four odd looking men and they came into this warehouse and they paid cash for 12 months in advance and they were only coming to stores at night in boxes. it looks suspicious. the fbi checked it out. these were american citizens and

they went to all of these free- market on the weekends and stop and that is where they store their staff and a primarily operating cash and that is why they paid in cash. and it was a perfectly legitimate reason, but it looked out of place and somebody reported it. no harm, no foul. i hope we do not live in a paranoid society. i congratulate you on what you did, madame. our: we see, it's coming to facebook page. you can join the conversation. traci points out that of the news is accurate, that these young men had been in the country for a decade, if not longer, she says, that means they were kids when they first came here. guest: the question we had much earlier about whether they were radicalize before they came here, maybe not at that age. what happened while they were here? that is one of the problems we see right now is with the internet. we have people here who are reading jihadist website every

day. and not only do they get radicalized by reading them, but they're also providing instructions about making bombs and other weapons. on the independent line. good morning. on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question about drugs and how that is associated with terrorism. to how citizens are paying fight the war on drugs. .uest: that is a good question a lot of terrorist organizations fund their operations with illegal drugs. they're very much connected. i have been involved on the warrant drugs since 1984 when i was at the embassy in bangkok. i spent a lot of time working in the golden triangle. president reagan brought in the cia to help with the war on

drugs because he thought it was a threat to our national security, which it is. the amount of money we have spent on them, we are not getting a good return of investment. i am a free market kind of guy. when you see the coast guard go out and capture a boat or a ship that has a couple of tons of cocaine on it and then three or four days later, the price of cocaine does not spike up at all, that tells me there is a sufficient supply getting in no matter what you do. do we need to deal with supply and demand? absolutely, but i think we need to focus more on demand. i got that more for my type frndthat worked with for ur years in thailand. they said, uil you do something about the demand in america,coppola -- in you will not affect things much here. not going tome is stop transporting it, because

there's so much profit to be made. until we get a better control of the demand in this country, the supplies going to be there because there's so much money involved. to answer your question, we're getting a very low return on investment. of thehe front page boston globe right now is this -- let's go to john in herndon, va., a democrat. caller: good morning, c-span. thank you for taking my call. i am a muslim myself, and i think you touched on a very ayha not all of the muslims are not terrorists. you realize there are always idiot out there who use the name of the muslims and they do some

kind of idiotic things like this. you say one very clearly. there's a problem with the internet. these kids -- someone, somewhere brainwashed these kids and tell them that if you kill innocent people, you will do something good for the muslims. that is the number-one issue. someone has to look into this internet, because there are a lot of problems that we have in society today that come through the internet. you can see that with child molesters. there are so many issues that you can look into. i do not know how far we have to go to stop the internet, but parents have to watch their children and what they watch every day. that is the main thing. i want to say one thing, the whole reason i called is i was listening earlier. you touch on the good points and the huge travel to a lot of countries. muslims are no different than

any other society. we have some idiotic people that will do some things. the christians have them, the jews have them. report to learn how to when we see things. i know this from living in this country for so long. you see someone beating somebody out there, and people walk by and they do not even call the police. it is amazing that something like this happens in this country. i will listen to your answer on the air. host: before you go, sinou wi us this morning as acve muim, howu dealithe concept of , say something. do you ever worry that will get into racial profiling or ethnic lot -- profiling? we have a caller called in earlier and she said she saw something that she did not think was right and she notified the store as well as the fbi. what are your thoughts? caller: i think that crime does not have a boundary.

you do not want to act like you're watching everybody. you do not want to do that. as a grown-up person, a smart person, and intellectual person, if you see a crime, you report it. if it is right or not, a pricey someone breaking into a house or someone doing something bad or suspicious, as a human being i have to report it. you have to learn how to prevent the crime before it happens. this is our was raised. i was raised that you see something wrong, you tell the grown-ups. but some people actually out of they do some reporting that is unnecessary. today, we live in a different world. we have to watch around us. if we see any crime, we're supposed to report it. i tell my children, if you see

anything wrong, let me know. anything that goes wrong, you have to report it. again, do you have some different ideas than the muslims and they always try to attack of that? yes, but i do not pick and choose. i see something wrong, i will reported. sharing yourou for thoughts. guest: thank you. one other thing ever like to mention is trying to discern -- because we have heard a lot of that today, muslims do all of these attacks. as well. those numbers when you consider the number of moslems in the world, the -- that is a very small percentage of people, those trying to attack us. there is an incredible movie out called the gatekeepers.

theateronly one small here in washington, d.c. played it. every year of shin bet leadership from 1980 through 2011. these people understand terrorism. if you really want to understand political terrorism and what causes it, go see that movie. if it were anybody other than the former leaders of the israeli security organization people would say it was an anti- semitic film. .ut it is not we need to look at the causes of it and what we need to do. it gets back to treating people like people. host: the boston globe said one suspect is dead and another is that large. shut down all services

globally. they made an early morning decision to shut down all services until the remaining suspect is apprehended has left commuters agitated, according to transit officials. the story talks to some locals who were taken by surprise as they were trying to had to work and did not know at a time about the lock down. as we mentioned, the front page of the boston globe is continually evolving and changing the sry. you n see here an image of two military police officers outside the transit sti a the city is the lockn de. ldaycontinues.hat residentsre t next caller from missouri, independent line. hi, glenn. old.r: i'm 84 years

my vote to raise me to respect the elderly, respect people, or treat them as i wanted to be treated. that, too.taught me they taught me to believe in god and religion. nowadays, they have taken got out of the country. they're taking got out of the schools. out ofy have taken god the country and out of the schools. if the parents treat it like they should be treated and make them do things instead of ask them to, and if this schools would teach kids -- and they will let the schools teach kids like they should be taught. they need to be punished. i do not mean kill them, i mean punish them. i do not know how many wappinger as i got what i was in school and when i went home, i also got

with things. they cannot do that anymore. it is against the law. we have kids running rampant. and one other thing, at one time called the federal icsnarcot agency to come into bokeld and come in and clean these places out. they said they would turn it over to an investigating committee in these counties. nothing has been done. host: clean them up in what sense? caller: dope. host: oh, drugs. caller: yes, and nothing has been done. .ost: i will share one other with you, colonel. all background checks should be

done with a polygraph and stress test to ensure the utmost honesty. mike says there should be a rigorous test involved when people come in overseas. guest: i'm really glad someone brought up a polygraph test. i have a lot of friends and the intelligence community. the national academy of science did a big city. they -- these are the best scientists in america. they did a big study and they said they are pretty much useless. the people who can fake their way through them are pathological liars, people would take certain drugs, and people who have been trained to defeat them. and the people who have the most problems with them are of the highest moral standards. and y say, --n i say, have you ever stolen anything?

stillu say, well, i susie's pencil in the third grade. and you start worrying about this and that. it is junk science and it is useless. and yet, our intelligence agencies depend on them. there is a good topic for you here on c-span sunday. randall larsen is our guest. he is a retired colonel and a founding member of the institute for homeland security. he is also a national security adviser at the center for by a security.- bio thank you for sticking around. we will ask to make your questions if we can. suspects involved with the boston manhunt. what has been killed.

killed.as been we're talking about questions of bioterrorism, prepare and as. -- preparedness. from new york state, hi, kevin. caller: good morning. t bring up the subject of bw back, october being used for political reasons -- terror being used for polil reasons. one statement on that a the one queson. timothy mcveigh attacked as a result of ruby ridge and waco. that was his motivation it was a perceived grievance. ultimate too the try to make things right, at least in his mind, using a horrible methodology. what we have is blow back.

i will also just ask this question. do you feel there is a chance of low back considering the use of drones and the drone killings and what ever perceived grievances might occur from that program? clearly, timothy mcveigh was the motivation had to do with ridge -- ruby ridge and some serious issues with the fbi. inking a large truck bomb front of a day care center at a federal building, i still think -- i was there ashortly after te explosion. it is one of the worst cases of feitlln fecthave ever seen in my on me. timothy mcveigh, i'm glad he got his just reward for what he did. was it black? yes. you can write your congressman

-- was a blow back? yes. you can write your congressman. there are tons of things you can do. however, your other question about the drones, there is great concern about this. meat -- arote a famous memo about this targeted killing, are we creating more terrorists? that is a good question. i think is a very legitimate question and i think we should deal with that and some of the other partisan issues we're dealing with. and others are now saying that we could use drones in the u.s. the and the members that are worried about that. talking about very small drug -- very small drones that could be used in a building.

there was a big debate in congress about whether the president could use a drug to kill an american citizen and they're grabbing a hard time getting -- use a drone to kill an american and they were having a hard time getting an answer on that. that is a serious issue. host: nbc says they're looking for one remaining suspect. in next caller is steve mansfield, ohio. caller: i have a question for the colonel. i haven't got it yet in your explanation -- and i do thank you for your service. i am also an ex serviceman. i spent two of my active duty years in a muslim country in

northern africa. -- i know ared if lot of americans do not that the muslim is notn, their mosque only religious center like one of our christian churches. it is also their financial center, their political center, their social center, and there radicalization centers all rolled into one. i do not think a lot of americans understand this. i have read the koran in english translation, of course. and a man that you may be hassamah dakba, he

a an egyptian who is now baptist minister. his very literal translation, not one of these glossy ones that telcel many large -- lies -- that tell somebody lies. and i've heard a lot of this from a lady named clara lopez. my question to you is whether you think the american public should know more about what islam is really about, and if they really read the koran and ,he literal translation of it there are two different sessions. where mohammadon was kicked out, and then the

benina section where he was turned radical. host: let's hear from the colonel. oest: i am not an expert islam. i have many muslim friends. i worry when occasionally i get an e-mail from someone that says, well, look at this sentence from the koran. does not make you think this is a dangerous religion to as americans? but i can go through the christian bible and i can find sentences that saada is ok to kill a disobedient wife. if you take things out of context -- that is in the old testament, which might christian friends tell me it is a historical thing that we had. if you want to read the book of ezekiel about what can be done

and what you can and cannot do. i always worry about people who take a sentence or two out of any religious document and say, see. from to get my information religious leaders of all religions and find out what the essence is. i know the four pillars of to christian.lar my's vomit friends tell me, we are all the same boat, the jewish -- my islamic friends tell me we are all the same book, the jewish religion, the christian religion, and the islamic religion. it is easy to pick out these things. and not just people here, but the islamic terrorists that are radical can also do that. just like those who like to put bombs and abortion clinics can say it is because you're killing babies. bostonurning back to the

marathon bombings and what have that -- what has happened in the last 12 hours, here is a twitter feed from the boston globe. this is the officer that was killed in a confrontation with the terror suspects. and a review of what has happened, police have been warning residents in watertown, mass. to stay in their homes. begantbreak of violence when the police received a report a robbery at a convenience store near mit. and a few minutes later at an mit officer was shot multiple times while in his cruiser. he wasrounced dead at massachusetts general hospital. a short time later, the two men carjacked a mercedes as u.b. at gunpoint and the honor of -- and

it has gone on from there. we are asking you what you think about these latest developments. paris, ill..aller, hi, stacy. i kind ofcan't -- overlap two different religions. i was born and raised a christian. i converted to islam about seven years ago. i want to thank you for saying that if you get down to the basics of islam, it is a religion of peace. that thoseu say radicals believe in their religion, that is true, no matter what. everyone wants to look at is, and say it is bad. no, it is not. it is a religion of peace.

your also just speaking -- you were also just speaking to that a gentleman that says the koran says this. the koran cannot be translated to any religion -- language except arabic. host: what are you making of what is happening right now in boston? what are your thoughts this morning on that? caller: i think it's horrible. the kids are not representing muslims. this is something where the kids just decided to say, hey, let's do this. if they were representing muslims, they would have stepped and said we did this. host: and to be clear, we hav not made any correlation or have it -- nor have we read it in the

news that there is a correlation. the we have just been responding to the callers that have been talking about religion and how that factors into the broader discussion. is that fair, colonel? not --son why we are talking about religion this morning is not related to what happened in boston. we have to be very careful when i was driving in ,his morning i was thinking where is this going to go? americans,jority of do you know what the five pillars of islam are? it is no different than the christian bible about belief in a single by that you should worship. and charitable giving is such a

big thing. and fasting. then themadan, and pilgrimage to mecca. those are the basic fundamentals of islam. the killing has nothing to do with their ras t do with their culture and how people have corrected this. --rupted this. host: we have over 600 comments on our facebook page. you can join that conversation. bill is our next phone call from portsmouth, arkansas. -- fort smith, arkansas. this is built here, a former chief officer from vietnam. guest: good to hear from you, bill. then, we still have

a lot of men missing, and a lot of them were missing because of special action it units, which is what they used to call terrorism units back in the day. it is the same type of warfare. guest: absolutely. the amount of terrorism that took place in vietnam -- bill is a great american. he spent a tremendous amount of his life helping to locate the pow's and the missing in action and finding the crash sites over there. bymany of them were killed terrorists. what people do not understand is, i was there in 1968 and 1969 when i was a helicopter pilot over there. tilt -- bill's wife is from the city i was in. they took all of the city leaders, the educated people, the businessmen. they marched them out and killed

them and put them in mass graves. that is terrorism on a large scale. today, we would call it genocide. we lost so many of our men and so many of our allies over there. good to hear from you, bill. ast: colonel randy larsen is retired colonel and a founding member of the institute for homeland security. he was also the executive director of the congressional commission on the prevention of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism. he was the first to testify before the 9/11 commission and served as an expert witness for the house and senate committees. inflew 400 combat missions vietnam. we are talking this morning about what is happening this morning in boston and the aftermath of there. the headline in the boston globe

is that one suspect is still at large. another has been killed. rts of boston are essentially in lockdown mode. ss-transit shattered for the mt. hool is out. universities are closed down. is our next caller on the independent line. caller: if all of these problems are solved, where can you go and place the answers so it will be over with? there's the paper form where the , when they have , when theyth the war have come back and they did not get paid. out ofike getting trouble, but in this state they never get out of trouble.

down the posted of him and went through the army and search all those people and brought them back here to the states, once they get here, we are still out of order about them here, as here, and war tactics. host: i'm not sure who you are referring to. caller: what do you mean? hollywood, florida. .ost: let's move on to tom caller: i also want to thank you for your service. onf e previous callers spebo education in schools. i think that it's a biake thhey ti separation -- they took separation of church and state a little too far.

>> there's a lot less violence in our public schools until two years ago when i had to take my ho.ldren out of our christian habitses, as soon as he got into a public school, and has been much harder to deal with, and i had to take away certain video games because

i'm not -- i'm nuts about, okay, taking video games away from everybody, but i did see that my son was more prone to being a little wilder, unntroll and more hands on with m daughte when he was playing these little 1-person shooter games, so i took them away and things got a little better. many we need to educate people a little better along those lines at school and let educators do what they do, but also, teach them about god, let them -- our i think it's a disgrace they aren't allowed to say pledge allegiance in schools and maybe that may go towards curing gun violence and educate people that background checks aren't going to be official and we're not going to lose our guns here in murky think because we have to have a

background check. i think that background checks are fine for private sales. host: let's get a few more calls before we lose coal knoll larsen, to ef flynn chicago. go ahead, evelyn. caller: good morning, both of you. have a blessed day. with the terrorists, about an hour and a half ago, i heard on the radio that the two boys came from an islamic sect in russia. secondly, host: -- host: , evelyn, what's your news source where did you hear that? >> caller: have their babies and the babies receive a free citizenship. th aink that's very grave then throughout the world. i think we're going to see so many, many horrible things. but anyway, thank you: host: evelyn, are you still with

us? where did you get your news, from evelyn? caller: wfmt. host: let's go to mike, phoenis, azoo phoenix, arizona, a republican. hi mike. caller: thank you for your service. i'm a third generation military vet myself. and i just have a couple of quick comments here. this accident that took place in boston, i think it's a huge cry out for help from these kids, because if it was a real organization, they would have stepped up and claimed responsibility for that. also, another quick comment i'd like to make is that the background checks that we want to do, the gun enforcements, i was raised around weapons my whole life, it didn't make me a terrorist t. didn't make me a criminal. the only people that the background checks or guns stop are the law-abiding citizens. the criminals or organization s will have the weapons. it's only people that pay attention to the laws, pay

attention to the rules, that are going to be subjected to this. d i think that people are missing that point. host: let's get a response from colonel larsen. guest: it's interesting that no one claimed responsibility we were talking about is this terrorism. everyone says terrorism, from the state department -- now that we're finding, they're rather young, whatever, that's interesting that they didn't claim responsibility for it or didn't ask for anything, which terrorists -- bin laden was all about the u.s. getting out of the middle east. what was the purpose of this? you'd think that if you're going to go kill innocent civilians, it's not just to kill people, it would be for something, but it's obvious they haven't asked for anything. host: colonel larsen, before we let you go, final thoughts, what will you be

watching for over the next 24 hours? >> guest: hopefully we capture this individual and hopefully they capture him alive and that's a real challenge. i don't want to see any law enforcement officer -- we've already lost one officer, i hope we we don't lose more but it would be of great value if we capture him live, first of all, are there any cells, are they working with anyone. the intelligence source is important. maybe these with two -- are two lone brothers, but we need to find that out. guest: colonel larsen from homeland security, thank you very much for talking with us guest: thank you. host: we will be joining a hearing looking at immigration. this is homeland security -- well, i'll tell you what we will be seeing in a moment. my apologies for being fuzzy on this, but we will get to a hearing in a moment, the senate judiciary committee, immigration legislation. we had expected to see janet

napolitano, secretary of the department of homeland security, but she will not be attending. that's the latest news. you can see members of the judiciary gathered there right now. we will still be seeing that hearing go forward. other witnesses, we expect to see, are douglas holkakin, president of the american action forum. this will be revolving around the immigration legislation that was unveiled in the senate this week, with a gang of eight, the bipartisan proposal, and you can see some of the senate members there. we will keep taking your calls until they get underway. john in michigan, on the independent line, go ahead. caller: well, i just had a question for the gentleman that left, the colonel, and i was wondering if he would speak on our or address the resources we've had for a good 150 years, where political terrorists was

something that was done consistently throughout the united states, and we always have had a large source of people that could and did u their talent in the military and a great many resources throughout the country and i just wondered if he -- well, he can't now because he's gone. but i really thought about it, and -- >> why is it significant to you? elaborate on it for us. caller: pardon? >> host: why is it significant to you? >> caller: i'm one of those people that directly and indirectly was -- it was something that i think it needs to be addressed or the knowledge that people should understand that we have people that were very capable of going throughout the world or staying in the country, doing things that were completely against a particular group of people

that no one rarely addressed but it was common knowledge among people that just lived, maybe older, that recognized for quite a time, a long time, certain people have that's guns at universities and have just been able to flourish, and represented in congress and various houses of our country, and i jus want someone sometime to address rtain things of that nature. host: okay, john calling from michigan, thank you for all of your calls. and look at -- looking at what's happening in boston and reflecting on the broader issues of terrorism in the united states. that's all for "washington journal" today. we'll leave you now with the senate judiciary committee, scheduled hearing on immigration legislation. as we mentioned, the department of homeland

security secretary janet napolitano was slated to testify but we do not expect to see her now, however, the hearing on immigration will proceed >> [inaudible conversations] >> the committee could come to order please. i apologize for the d. as you know, there is a great deal going on in

massachusetts. i hope everybody can well understand why the secretary napolitano will not be here. we will reschedule her. i hope she won't mind me mentioning, but i totally agree in the way that law enforcement has responded. i am distressed of an officer being killed and critically wounded, just as we are of all the people who were injured or killed from the marathon.

it should have been a joyous, joyous occasion, as most marathons are, prospectives and participants and otherwise and i want to thank dr. holtz-eakin and mr. cassano for being here and we'll go forward. the bipartisan proposal we have established to citizen -- citizenship, the 11 million undocumented immigrants in this country, it addresses the current immigration system, backlogs that have kept families apart really for decades, and dreamers brought these children to the country through no fault of their own, the agriculture workers were essential to part of our

communities and worked so hard to provide our nation's food supplies, and make important changes to the visas used by dairy farmers, the tourism, by immigrant, investors, or make investments in our communities. it addresses the needs of our law enforcement community, requires the help of immigrants who witness crime or victims of domestic violence, some of whom are now afraid to come forward because of their status, it improves the treatment of refugees as asylum seekers, ands united states remains the beacon of the world as it was to my paternal parents and paternal parents, and i appreciate the fact that we ha four mem omee who worked with others in forming bipartisan consensusd k senator schumer and senator durbin, senator

graham and senator plate for that. and of course, senator feinstein, who is probably more about immigration than -- thought me more about immigration than i ever would have learned otherwise. and the bill includes what some are calling triggers, i'm concerned they could long delay green cards for those that want to make full and contributing participants in our society. i do not want people to move out of the shadows, but then be struck in -- stuck in some underclass, just as we should not fault dreamers for bringing children, should not make states and futures dependent on border conditions on which they have no control and i'm disappointed we're not treating families all equally i abhor the discrimination that gay and lesbian families

face, i'm concerned about the visa changes for siblings, the lack of priority for how the points base visa system works in practice. these are all things we can discuss. i can't help but question whether spending millions more in defense from united states to mexico is really the best use of dollars, but i do know that each one of us can write what we want, and each one of us may have a different bill. you have a bill that's a product of compromise, very difficult concessions by all involvedand i mentioned senator schumer and senator schumer, durbin, graham, and plate, but also, senator feinstein and senator senator menendez, senator rubio, senator bennett, all worked on this. so now we're bringing to the public this immigration

hearing. it's the fourth we've had this year. we will hold hearings on monday. we will find time for secretary napolitano to come before the committee and discuss that with senator grassley. and so i hope these will give the public an opportunity to learn about it. certainly, every one of us loves to want to say we -- every one of us will have plenty of time to analyze this bill before we actually start marking it up in may. but just remember, immigration is an ongoing source of renewal of our spirit, our creativity, and also, our economic strength. young students brought to this country by loving parents seeking a better life, hard working men and women who play by the rules supporting our farmers, and innovating for our technology companies, or creating businesses of their own. our nation continues to benefit from immigrants, as

it did when my parents came here. we need to uphold the fundamental values of family, rd work, and fairness. in vermont, immigration has promoted cultural riches, refugee resettlement, student exchange. economic development to the five regional senate programs, tourism, and trade with our friends, in that wonderful country of canada. foreign agricultural workers support vermont farmers and growers, many of whom become part of families, woven into the fabric of vermont's ag consult -- agricultural community as they have in so many other states. the dysfunction of the system affects all of us. now is our time to fix it. this is our opportunity to do it. act deliberately, but we have to act. we can talk about it, but eventually, we have to vote. millions of people. millions of americans are depending upon us. senator grassley.

>> yes. on this side, mr. chairman, we understand why the secretary can't be here and we feel she is doing exactly what she should be doing, and we'll have an opportunity, when things settle down, to question her. and we also appreciate the opportunity to talk about immigration, particularly in light of all that's happening in massachusetts right now and over the last week. i know that the people of boston and watertown are in everybody's thoughts this morning. we're here trying to understa why these events have occurred.it's hard to undet there are people in this world that want to do americans harm, so this hearing is an opportunity to refocus on the issues at hand and the importance of remaining vigilant in securing our homeland. we appreciate the exactly 30 years ago today, april 19th,

1983, this committee held a hearing to discuss the immigration reform and control act. senator simpson, the author of that bill, opened the meeting by presenting the bill and stating its purpose, quote, its purpose, a very simple one: to control illegal immigration in the united states and to control legal immigration without lamenting immediately family reunification, end of quote. but he further stated, quote, the first duty of a sovereign nation is to control its borders. we do not do that. end of quote. and i suppose that's still the situation today. the bill, we debated that day, would provide legalization of millions of people already in the united states. on that day, senator simpson stated further, quote, we're attempting to assure that this is a one-time-only program. end of quote.

the bill we're considering today, according to the bipartisan group of eight senators who crafted it will,uri successful, permanent reform to our immigration system that will not beevisit d now, 30 years have passed and wee saying the same thing, facing the se problems. we're proposing the same remedies and asking the american people to trt that we will get serious about enforcing our immigration laws. so let me be clear. i have to applaud, like other people have, the group of eight senators for their commitment to reforming our broken immigration system. time will tell if this bill solves that problem the way that their statement did to ensure that this is a successful, permanent reform to our immigration system so that we will not have to revisit it. so i quoted that twice now. throughout the debate, s444,

the border security economic opportunity and immigration modernization act, i will be asking whether this bill avoids the same mistakes and truly fixes our immigration system for the generation to come. because we thought when that bill passed in 1986, that's what we did. we did everything in good faith, shutting off the magnet to bring people to this country by making it illegal to hire illegal, undocumented people for the first time, but we didn't look far enough ahead, and we didn't do it right, as we all know now. i've made it clear that this bill needs to go through the committee process, and it will. i have argued that this bill must opene open to nsion nn dur the oonde've b told that it will. every mb of th must have an opportunity to read, analyze and approve provthe bill, and -- approve the bill and the schedule will permit that.

unfortunately, i think that we're kind of off to a rough start from the standpoint that the majority is rationed to read and analyze the bill. it's just under 900 pages, and tactile on important issues. there are new concepts. most members of staff on the committee have not read of bill in its entirety before this hearing. certainly we should be afforded enough time to understand and debate the bill and we've been assured we will. in 1983 before the judiciary committee met on that day, the subcommittee on immigration held four hearings before it reported the bill to the full committee. this year, before the -- the year before that, the committee held 16 hearings, and five consultations. prior to may 1982, markup of the same bill, the committee had 100 hours of hearings and 300 witnesses. we have expert that is need to be heard on this bill. we need to hear from people who live and work along the border. we need to understand how changes in our visa program will affect businesses and american workers. we need to know how new

concepts will be put into practice. and most importantly, we need to hear from the congressional budget office about the impact the bill will have on the taxpayers. this is not something to be rifed. we have to get it right, like we thought we got it right in 19 # six. otherwise the goals of the bipartisan group to solve the problem once and for all will not be met. and given the events of this week, it's important for us to understand the gaps and loopholes in our immigration system. while we don't yet know the immigration status of people who haveerrorizee communities in massachusetts, when we find out, it will help shed light on the weaknesses of our stem. how can individuals evade authority and plan such attacks on our soil, how can we beef up security checks on states, how to do us harm are not eligible for benefits under the immigration laws, including this new bill before us. we have a long road ahead of

us, to pass legislation to reform our immigration system. we cannot tolerate anything less than a transparent and deliberative process to improve the bill because we thought we were doing that exactly, that way, in 1986, but we screwed up, and we can't afford to screw up again. thank you. >> and with that, which is why we're going to make sure we are going to be voting on this sometime in the next month, and we will have it open, and like all our deliberations, it will be streamed on our website and i understand from the i.t. people -- we will hire a law firm, benzick, freelander, copeland? please, go ahead.

>> [inaudible] >> is your microphone on? >> thank you mr. chairman, senator grassley, members of the committee. a member of the civil rights and i'm here in my capacity. civil rights was established -- >> he needs a microphone. >> this was established in the95 to among other things examine matters related to denials of protection and race and discrimination and because immigration ofte implicates matters pertaining to national origin and discrimination, the commission over the years has regularly conducted hearings on aspects of immigration including illegal immigration. the most recent such hearing occurred dealing with the specific issue of the effect of illegal immigration on the wage and employment levels of americans, specifically black americans and the evidence produced at that hearing showed that illegal immigration a disproportionately negative effect on employment and wage

levels of low skilled americans, specifically black americans. >> mr. chairman, we have a hard time hearing. if you can get that a little closer. it's important to remember that witnesses at the hearing were witnesses that spanned the ideological spectrum. despite differences to policy every witness agreed that illegal immigration had a demonstrably bad effect on americans, specifically black americans, and the evidence as to why this impacts black americans is quite basic. black americans, specifically black males or disproportionately, concentrated in the low skill labor market, disproportionately more likely to have only a high school diploma, like lies illegal immigrants disproportionately, concentrated in the low skill labor mt, disproportionately likely to have low levels of educational achievement, and these two groups compete

against one another in the lowkior market. that competition is often most fierce in those areas of the econy where blacks have historically been highly concentrated and blacks frequently lose out on that competition, crowded out by illegal immigrants who, employers for various reasons prefer, as shown by professor vernon briggs of the cornell school of industrial labor relations, it's not because black americans or low skilled americans are unwilling to work, it's that they're unwilling to work at sometimes the cut rate wages and substandard benefits tendered to illegal immigrants, and highly unlikely to complain to the division of labor, the or osha. much of the competition is concentrated in major metropolitan areas such as new york, los angeles, chicago, but also, in rural areas now, and in southeast

states such as georgia, north carolina, virginia. the impact of illegal immigration on low skilled workers is significant in our stagnant economy. the unemployment rate for blacks without a high school diploma was 12 percent, today, it's more than doubled, to 24.6%. now, that clearly shows that we have an oversupply of low skilled labor relative to the -- that is for workers in all such classes, particularly black americans, because research shows that 40 percent of the 18-point percentage decline in the employment rates of black males is attributable to illegal immigration. that's hundreds of thousands of blacks without jobs. it translates to hundreds of thousands who can't pay taxes, who don't support their families on their own

dime. the evidence also indicated that in addition to the pressing wage -- sorry, employment levels, illegal immigration drove down wage levels, by the federal reserve bank of atlanta, for example, showed that illegal immigration, and the spike in illegal immigration, was attributable to the nearly $960 per year decrease in wage levels of documented georgians. and the leisure and hospitality industries, it was $1520. for doctors and lawyers, $960 may not be a whole lot, but as president obama observed in the extension of the payroll tax cut, $80 per month is significant for most families. it goes toward groceries. rent. gasoline. recent history shows that grant ofres the of illegal immigrants. further forng out l skilled lor thereby depressing theag and employment levs of those

americans. in addition to that, that necessarily inexorably leads to more americans depending upon the government for assistance. it swells the ranks of black unemployed and drives down the wages of those blacks who do have jobs. it's respectfully submitted mr. chairman that before the federal government grants lawful status, due deliberation be given to the the effect of that grant on the wage and employment levels of low skilled americans, because the evidence before the commission is that grant of that status is not without profound and substantial cost to the american worker. thank you mr. chairman. >> as with all witnesses a post statement will be made. dr. holtz-eakin is the president of the american action forum, formerly

director of the congressional budget office under george w. bush from 2003-2005. i believe that's what we first -- we were first together back at that time. pleased to have you here. >> thank you chairman leahy, members of the committee, it's a privilege to be here today. i have submitted a written statement for the record. let me brief he will make three points, and then i look forward to answering your questions. the first point is simply that the immigration reform bill before you has many aspects. there are important security considerations, there are sectoral economic impacts, legal issues which have to be resolved, but at its core, immigration reform represents an economic policy opportunity. it is an opportunity for the united states to dictate the evolution of its future population, and as i emphasized in my testimony, in the absence of immigration, low fertility rates means that the

population declines and it will dictate the labor force participation and effort exerted in our economy. it will have strong influences on the entrepreneurship and small business creation. the evidence is that new immigrants in the united states both work more, the labor force participation rates are higher, and have small businesses at a hire rate. as a result it will increase the productivity growth in the u.s. economy, the fundamental building block -- building block of higher standards of giving and generate larger economic growth numbers than we've seen in recent years. i've done estimates that benchmark reform suggests you could have as much as nearly a full percentage point faster growth over 10 years and associated with that would be something that i think every member of this committee would be quite pleased to see, that is less budgetary essure fas growth reduces using cbo rules of thumb, deficits by about 2 1/2 trillion dollars over 10 yea and that's clearly a bene that we ought to think about when we think ab immigration reform and not rely on those

efforts which ignore economic owi think that the u.s. is out of step with i economic competitors in tt it does not use immigration policy as a tool of economic policy, under 10 percent o immigration into the u.s. for econ purposes. this bill makes important changes toheisa system, basing them more on economic considerations and represents a step toward using a policy mix that is closer to other industrialized countries. a legitimate concern in all of this is what will happen to the federal budget. it's a concern that i have been close to for a long, long time. and i think a good way to think about the budgetary implications is to start with the last piece of comprehensive reform legislation that congress looked at in 2007. the cbo did have the opportunity at the time to put out a score. that score indicated that if you look at the balance between spending and revenues, it would, over 10 years, increase deficits by

about $18 billion. and $18 billion doesn't sound like a lot now, in the context of trillion dollars deficits, year after year, but i think that there are two things to remember about that $18 billion: since that time, many of the things that were policy objectives, border security and e verify system and other pieces of the immigration infrastructure, there has been spending on that, about half of what the cbo needed has happened. so those policy objectives may be cheaper and generate less in the way of spending. the second thing that's happened has been that cbo did not use dynamic scoring. it did not take into account the potential economic growth effects that would change the impacts entirely. resident sig,we'll hout,avainscs rdab care act, a largeitle ent program in the united states, ad my reading of this legislation is there's a bipartisan

commitment that those who have become registered, provisional immigrants, here illegally, would not be eligible for benefits, certainly not for 10 years, realistically not for 15, so there will not ab budgetary impact over that horizon. over the longer term, i think there's something that the congress should keep an eye on in terms of the budgetary outlook and i'd be happy to discuss with you the impact of this bill in that regard. but as i said before, i think the primary objective should be to make sure that when the many policy objectives are put on the table, economics does not get lost in the shuffle. this is a central tool to economic policy. this is an opportunity for us to improve on our growth record which has not been good. and i look forward for the chance to answer the questions they might have about that. thank you. >> thank you very much. you know, on the economics, you hear about low wage -- people may be hurt by this.

it's my experience that you have places where there's a large number of immigrants or undocumented that companies will show up and say here, we're going to p a flat rate for work fo the day, you can't complain about it, you're notng toi get any benefits, we'relso not going to do any withholdi to t government. doesn't that pretty well undercut hiring somebody, even somebody at minimum wage, but doing it legally? >> i think the impact of immigration on low skill employment wages is a really important issue and i'm glad it was raised in the opening statements. let me separate into two pieces. the first is illegal immigrants in the united states, there, i think if you look at the bill, there are two features that are important to think about. one, it would put those workers on a level, legal playing field with u.s.

workers, same workplace protection, same wage laws, thus changing that dynamic considerably. second is this is intended to cut off future illegal immigration. the border security, e verify, entry-exit visa triggers are all designed to do that. that changes whatever you may think the prevailing wisdom is on that. for immigration in general, mr. chairman, i want to just make sure that people understand, the evidence is not as it was characterized. there is good reason to believe that immigration raises the wages of ari workers, that they are complements to amecan workers, and i would emphasize two things. number one, if we're wor about the ability of low skilled americans to earn a wage, we should fix the low skill problem. that's the problem. it's not immigration. it's low skills. and if you think the competition begins when someone arrives in the united states, you're mistaken. we are competing with those workers now wherever they may be. >> you know, it's

interesting, your testimony mentioned the, quote, immigration policy is economic policy. >> yes. >> you talked about the entrepreneurial vigor. i visited these companies, i know the founders of most of them. between 25 percent of our highest growth companies, between 1990-2005, including intel, google, yahoo, ebay, employ hundreds of thousands of people a year in the united states, there are pretty good wages, they were begun by immigrants. in fact, 40 percent of the companies in the 2010 fortune 500 were started by immigrants and their children. that's something we should be thinking about. >> i would hope so. i mean, the evidence is quite clear on the capacity of immigration to bring intranan -- entrepreneurship to the

u.s. >> limited time here, but you released this analysis, including immigration reform with the proposal here, can boost the american economy by as much as one percentage point a year over the coming decade and reduce the deficit by as much as 2 1/2 trillion dollars. obviously, every one of us wrestle with budgets and deficits, it kind of perks up -- gives us our attention. do you want to elaborate on that a little bit? >> i guess i would say a couple of things. first, arriving at that estimate is a matter of arithmetic, not particular ingenuity. economic growth comes from growth in people, and their productivity. and immigration controls both the size of the labor force and since immigrants tend to work more and participate at higher rates than thenate of-born, you get labor force growth. as you've mentioned, we often get small businesses and entrepreneurs, which raise the productivity of those

workers, and there are benefits to faster overall economic growth in spreading innovation through the economy and thus raising productivity further. my estimates simply look at increases in immigration and follow the research, literature and rules of thumb for the impacts on g an t.'s n mag. 's jttic. i will say tt it's important to recognize, i didn't tailor that estimate to 2013, '14, '15. this bill looks like it will take some time to pass and implement, and that's fair. so you want to think of that as once you get up and running, what will the next 10 years look like. >> in fact, your testimony, you reference immigration legislation considered back in 2007. many of us were here at the time. some were concerned about the cost. but you say, quote, it is not 2007 anymore. it is important to consider what has happened since then to get a sense about the relevant budgetary effect that is have changed.

you can elaborate on that, sir? >> as i said, i think the key spending aspects have changed in two ways. on the discretionary side, many of the policy objectives of that legislation, border security, e verification, there has been expenditure on those systems, and so not all of the spending needs to be done, so it should be relatively cheaper. on the mandatory spending side, as i mentioned, the key change has been the passing of the affordable care act. the drafters of the legislation in front of us has, it looks to me, taken great bipartisan care to ensure that for the next 10-15 years. that doesn't impinge on the budgetary cost to this legislation. >> thank you very much. senator grass >> thanks both of you a witnesses. first question to both of u: since we genetion, very generous immigration system, even though it has problems, i've always argued that we must enhance and expand legal avenues for people who wish to live and work here. this bill makes many changes

in those legal programs and increases work permits and green cards. so my question to both of you is do either of you have an estimate on how the legal immigration levels will increase if we pass this bill? >> >> i don't have an estimate myself but i will say this. responding to something doug said, and i respect his opinion on these issues, there is a significant problem with respect to regularzation. whether or not the senate wants to do so or not, it's not going to help the employment levels of americans currently. i think e verify is a good idea. outstanding. making sure that all workers are subject to the same legal requirement requirements. outstanding idea. the problem is when you regularize 11 million people, the tiny advantage that current americans have insuch c.

if everyone is subject to the same set o rules, then former ieg immigrants will be on the same playing field 's to advantage low skilled workers here. we have -- 62 percent in the black community and certain demographics, one out of two men is working. and despite what some may say, that illegal immigration or immigration period doesn't have any impact, i resort back to one of my other incarnations as a member of the national labor relations board and practicing labor relations law, it is palpable, the competition that is driven out by illegal immigration. you talk to minority contractors, businessmen, they will tell you, we cannot compete, and if these individuals are now regularize dollars, in one fell swoop, the small advantage disappears. >> do you have a number for me dr. hotels ache stpheupb.

>> not a precise number -- dr. holtz-eakin? >> it looks to be 250,000, maybe north of that, depending upon the expansions, but i would be happy to get back to the more precise estimate as we become more comfortable with it. i'm going to ask you, dr. holtz-eakin, a question that deals with dynamic scoring, your use of it. i know you believe in it, i believe in it, but cbo only scores steady scoring. and we also had a vote on the budget bill, where 48 democrats in the senate v t dyagainsmic scoring. your projection regarding ate economic benefits orm a on that scoring. as former cbo director, whose cbo scores include dynamic economic impact for policy

changes, and would they use dynamic scoring in the case of elaborating on this bill, -- >> it's good to have this topic, this discussion with you again. i have lot of scars from the previous incarnations. no, cwo -- cbo does not. i've been yelled at many times over that. my point is that simply, when you get a cbo score which won't include those effects, recognize it's in that regard and know that there are benefits being counted in the impact of the legislation. >> if dynamic scoring should be used to measure economic benefits of immigration reform, surely, also, major -- measure dynamic economic benefits of lower rates of taxation as well. you usually agree with that. >> i do sir. >> but i'm trying to point out here that you can't have it both ways. maybe they're going to show that this is very positive from the standpoint of the economy, if you use dynamic scoring, but if you

static scori, it' not going come out so well. i have a question for our witness. you said this in your statement, so it's just a case of elaboration. the obvious question is whether there are sufficient jobs in low skill labor markets for both african-americans and illegal immigrants. the answer is no, end of quote. >> that's exactly right. as i indicated just previously, we have a labor participation rate that is at historic lows. we have an abundant supply of low skilled labor waiting for jobs. and it appears as if what we will do by regularizg a significant coheart, millions of individuals, is leap frogging those individuals. we've got millions upon millions of americans, not just black americans, but millions upon millions who don't have a job right now,

and i think it's a good idea to reform the immigration system but due regard must be given to the fact that we have an overabundance people who are not working today. if you take a look at the various rates, we are at rates we haven't seen in 75, 80 years. it's astonishing. we have regular -- if we have regularization of a greater pool of individuals who compete on a one by one basis with americans here today, those individuals are not going to be single jobs. they don't have the resources, skill sets,o compete on the same level. >> >> since my time is up, i would simply make a statement about e verify, because i'm the author of e verify, and they said to put my provisions in this bill. i haven't checked that closely yet. but i think it takes -- it

gives five years to put it into effect, and i hope that somebody on the panel will be able to say if that's soon enough or if it can be done sooner. >> thank you. >> i'm glad to see so many here. we're going to -- as i tried to do, we're going to keep on schedule, and i will yield now to senator feinstein. i have to take a phone call out back. so i will also hand her the gavel, and i should be back in a few minutes. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. i want to use my time to briefly speak about the bill that -- the part of the bill that i had something to do with. first of all, i want to congratulate senator schumer and others that worked on crafting the big bill. but i want to point out to everyone, and this is the first time i've had a chance to do this, that agriculture in this industry and it is in the main served by undocumented immigrants, people who become very

skilled at the work that they do do. one of the things that' happened is that agriculture has been incline to a lot o us -- to a lot of us, has gone outside oth country. some of it has been had to curtail activities because theyave not been able to attract an american work force. i want particularly to thank senator hatch and his staff, matt sungrid, who worked on this, along with senator rubio, his staff, enrique gonzalez, who was super and senator bennett who sat through a great many of these negotiating sessions. we negotiated with literally a multiplicity of farm organizations represented by specific groups, as well as the farm workers union. the employers wanted wage specificity, and they wanted out of a bls statistical

gathering which they believed skewed wages. the farmers wanted decent wages and worker protections. i believe we have achieved both. the program has what's called blue card program for workers that are in this country, have been working ag for a period of time, will be committed to continue to work ag, will pay a fine, will get a blue card, and that will lead to a green card. secondly, it creates two additional visa programs. it does away with h2a, creates a new contract program, and also, an at-will portable visa program. they have a cap on visas of 112,000. visas, a year, for both programs, 300,000, over three years. the jurisdiction of the program is placed under the department of agriculture. secretary avagg, we discussed

it with him, he is willing, and he with make available his farm service agencies which exist in every county of our nation to aid farmers as they do the necessary filings and also, farm workers as well. i believe it's a good solution. my understanding is that both sides have held press conferences to indicate their support. there are a couple of edits that we need to make in the bill. senator schumer. but by in large, it is a g. strong program. i believe it will result in a consistent supply of agricultural workers for our farmers. so i thank y. floo and recognize senator hatch. >> well, thank you senator feinstein. and i'm appreciative of both of you and your testimony here today.

the area of high skill immigration is very important to me. i want to support this bill if i can. i have some questions about it. but let me just make a couple of points here. as you might know for several years, i served as chairman of the senate republican high tech task force and in january, the senators klobuchar, rubio and i introduced the act of 2013, commonly referred to as the i-squared bill. today i-squared has 26 sponsors, five of them on the judiciary commit east it's been endorsed by countless companies and organizations. if you haven't already, i hope you will take a look at that bill. the i-squared act addresses the immediate short term need to provide american employers with greater access to high skilled workers. it also addresses the long term need to invest in america's stem education. this 2-step approach will enable our country to thrive and help us to compete in today's global economy. i took a careful look at the high skilled visa provisions

of theecen iroduced comprehensive bill, to see they compared with the i-squared bill. i want to list some of the areas they think need to change in these provisions. most people don't realize that t bill requires the government to micromanage compliant american companies and how they and their customers choose to interact in the marketplace. unlike i-squared, this bill creates burdensome outplacement, displacement and free recruitment obligations. the provisions inhibit the companies from effectively operating in a global economy where employee mobility is critical. in the introduced comprehensive immigration bill, the increase in the h1b cap is only allowed for the following: not current, fiscal year, and they would only be raised after satisfying a complex formula. therefore the proposed market adjustment mechanism will not effectively restore to real time needs. the proposed stem education and training language would

fund federalcle prescribed priorities instead of directing grant money to the states. the states should have the capability to set and pursue individual stem education needs. on a related matter, though, i'm very pleased to have worked with senators feinstein, rubio and bennett in crafting the new agriculture visa program in this bill. throughout the negotiations i can't tell you how many times i heard complaints about the existing h2a visa category, and why we needed to craft a new guest worker program to meet the demands of the agriculture industry. the existing program is underutilized who to you arduous and bureaucratic the employers find the visa program and that's why this this bill we sense that the h2a program, and i tell you all this, because as the h1b and l1 provisions currently stand, the bill could be rendered unworkable for many u.s. employers, and these visa categories could follow

the same fate as the soon to sunset 42a program. dr. holtz-eakin, you've written that immigration reform can have positive effects on economic growth as you've testified here today, possibly raising per capita gross domestic product by over $1500. of course, many effects of fresh waves of legal immigrants would be felt in decades to come and not necessarily in the immediate term. but we couldlsoee near-term effects. legal workers pay into the social security trust funds that eventually collect benefits. of course, it may become disabled. they also collect disability insurance from a program with a trust fund which will be exhausted by 2016. have you personally thought about what might be near term and longer term effects on the social security programs if there were to be a significant increase in legal immigration? >> well, i have thought about that a little bit. i think timing is important.

i mean, i certainly think that concerns about current high levels of unemployment and absence of imposed on the trust are legitimate. it does not look to me that this bill would have significant impacts for anything under five years, mostly 10, before we see significant inflows, so i would hope, and i'm sure you share this, that we're not looking at over 7 1/2% unemployment five years from now, and god forbid, you said unemployment at 14 percent. if you think this is entering into an economy that's working much better, we will see inflows of immigrants who will pay taxes up front that will help fund current retirees and will ultimately qualify for benefits, and there the issue, i think, is about future of the social security system, and that's a question about social security reform, not really about immigration reform. i think we do need a social security reform. >> i thank you for york work in this -- your work in this area and appreciate both of you being here today. >> thank you very much,

senator hatch. senator schumer? >> thank you senator feinstein. first let me thank you and senator hatch for your great work on agriculture. i would also want to thank chairman leahy for having this hearing, his leadership on the issue of immigration has been amazing, and those of us in our little group can't support him enough, can't thank him enough for considering our bill and agreeing to mark up the bill in judiciary committee. i'd also note before i get started with my friend senator hatch, about 85, 90 percent of what's in his bill is in our bill. it's very friendly to high tech. i know we want to make changes but overall it's positive from the high tech perspective. >> thank you. i'd like to you really look that up. >> i will. >> because it deserves a look >> you bet. before i get to the bill, i'd like to ask that all of us not jump to conclusions regarding the events in boston. or try to conflate those events with this legislation. in general, we're a safer

country when law enforcement knows who is here, has their fingerprints, photos, et cetera, has conducted background checks, and no loor -- longer needs to look at needles through haystacksings, in addition, the refugee program and asylum program have been significantly strengthened in the past five years, such that we are much more careful about screening people and determining who should and should not be coming into the country. and if there are any changes that our homeland security experts tell us need to be made i'm committed to making them as chairman of the immigration subcommittee and will work with others on this committee to happen and finally, two days ago as you recall there were widespread erroneous reports of arrests being made. this emphasizes how important it is to allow the fact toss come out before jumping to conclusions about boston. >> now, on the bill, i believe this is the most balanced piece of immigration legislation that has ever been produced. the american people, and all of our colleagues, should read this bill over the next few weeks.

and they will have ample time to look at every page and every paragraph before we go to markup in committee. what they will find is a bill that secures our borders, combats visa overstays, cracks down on employers who hire unauthorized workers, unleashes the potential of our legal immigration to create robust economic growth, provides a tremendous jolt to our business and leisure travel industries, and i want to thank senator hirono for her help with that, and deals with the status of undocumented individuals in a tough, fair, and practical way. so i believe one of the words that most signifies this bill is balance. that's why we were able to get eight people with very diverse views to agree to a bill, and i think the american people will find it the same. now for some questions. first, to peter kirsanow. i know you are deporting 11 million who are here for the reasons stated, but

assuming that can't happen, which you don't assume, but most people do, but most do, especially those who are unhappy about illegal immigration, isn't it better to have those here illegally, able to work legally? because they will be then be paid a higher wage, and wage rates for everybody else will go up. in my neighborhood, in brooklyn, and i think this is true throughout america, and i ride my bicycle through brooklyn early in the morning, and i see on street corners, day laborers, waiting to be picked up, and i guarantee you -- >> we are going to break away, the u.s. house is coming in. this continues live at c-span.org. this is live coverage of the house on c-span. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c., april 19, 2013.

hereby appoint the thomas petri to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray, eternal god we give you thanks for giving us another day. lead us this day in your ways that our nation might be guided along the roads of peace, justice and goodwill. we ask your protection upon those involved this day with pursuit and arrest of the marathon bombing suspect in boston. send your spirit of peace upon its inhabitants. bless all persons who are tortured and troubled in heart and think that violence is an

option. give them hope and justified confidence there are many who care for them and wish to help with whatever their need. bless us this day and every day and may all that is done be for your debater honor and glory. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1, rule 1, the journal stands approved. the chair will lead the house in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible with liberty and the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable, the speaker, house of

representatives. sir, pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on april 19, 2013, at 9:48 a.m. that the senate passed without amendment h.r. 1246. with best wishes i am signed sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the house stands adjourned until tuesday >> back at noon for legislative business. at 2:00, a measure to help people with pre-existing conditions get health insurance. and another bill regarding helium. live coverage here on c-span.

now back live to the senate hearing, the judiciary hearing on immigration. secretary napolitano was set to testify but canceled. she's participating in a briefing at the white house on the investigation and into the boston bombings. this is live coverage on c-span. counting on a substantial increase in the number and quality. --appeared to me >> what would you say this? we will have immigration. the question is will it be lawful and will it serve the national interest? i think you would agree with that. i think that we need to talk more about the issue you are raising. there are people out there today, young men and others in particular that need to be working today that cannot find work. the jobs and work they get need

to be at a decent wage. they need to have an opportunity for some sort of retirement or maybe a vacation or maybe a health care plan they can operate on. you are correct that we are not providing that today. there's a real social danger happening in america from that the unemployment. >> senator, i think that the question is who benefits ? i'm not sure. i would like to take my time in going through the 900-page bill. there are a lot of working part. i think it will take me months to absorb even 1/10 of what's going on. i lived in the city of cleveland. it is devastated, not just from the standpoint of unemployment but the downstream effects of unemployment. in our hearings if at the civil

rights commission, we focused on the effect of integration on blacks and other low-skilled workers. it dealt with employment, but there was a cascade effect that went into the incarceration rate, single-family rates, and all the other pathologies that flow from all those issues. >> i think you are exactly correct. professor at harvard has written about the connection with incarceration and unemployment rates and property. let's consider this situation. a job opens up -- first let me note that in the last month according to the labor statistics, 88,000 americans only found a job. 486,000 dropped out of the labor market. only 1/5 of those retired. 4/5 dropped out because they had

given up. there's a job opens up. it pays a decent wage for low- skilled workers. who should get that job if there's a choice? would it be better for the economy and america if an unemployed american drawing unemployment insurance, perhaps on welfare or food stamps and other benefits, would it be better for america if the american unemployed citizens got that job rather than bringing in labor from abroad to take that job? >> the question answers itself. we have 90 million people in the civilian population that are not working right now that could work. we are thinking about expanding the labor supply. that is madness. jobs for wayew too many people. >> colleagues, this is

indisputable. we have more low-skilled labor than we can find jobs for today. this bill does not reduce the flow of low-skilled labor into america. if it does not confront that problem. it is a fundamental reason that my democratic colleagues complained when president bush was in office that the average wage of working americans has been declining relative to inflation for maybe 15 or more years. i just worry iit. this is not considered properly in this bill that was written often by big business, big agriculture interests rather than the public interest. >> i would note that i was a strong supporter of president george w. bush's efforts and comprehensive immigration policy. >> thank you. >> i opposedit. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this is not the first hearing we have happened in the dishes

sheering committee on immigration -- in the judiciary committee on immigration. i want to refer back to a subcommittee hearing that i think senator schumer chaired in 2009. one of the witnesses that the chairman called was dr. alan greenspan. reviewsnspan has mixed among different folks as to his credibility, but he has a considerable number of at here nts.dhera i would like to relate some of the testimony provided in that hearing. he said "there's little doubt that unauthorized -- that is illegal immigration -- has made a significant contribution to the growth of our economy."

open " unauthorized immigrants serve as a flexible component of our workforce, often a safety valve when demand is pressing and among the first to be discharged when the economy falters. some evidence suggests that unskilled illegal immigrants marginally suppress wage levels. wageer, the estimated suppression and fiscal costs are relatively small. theomists generally view overall economic benefits of this work force as significantly outweighing cost. the benefits of this work force significantly outweighing the cost." he is saying that about a workforce that is at that point being the status of illegal. he used the word "unauthorized." there you agree with that?

you are an economist, mr. douglas holtz-eakin. and by bringing them into the daylight, what effect would that have? parts i agree with the basic p oint. the impact of bringing them into illegal labor force would been twofold. the first is, from the perspective of the worker, it would eliminate the capacity for exploitation and bad working conditions. from the employer's standpoint, it would allow them to pick flexibly managed their labor force without severe -- without fear of legal repercussions, which every employer would like to do. i guess the thing that i find frustrating about the debate is that there are two aspects of the economics that have emerged as utterly clear over the past several years. number one, the presence of competition that is a real issue for our low-skilled americans is

not about immigration. it is about being in a global economy where there is a great abundance of low-skilled labor and geographic location has very little to do with it. the bill does not change that. that's a reality we cannot change. >> off schuring of american jobs has as much to do with it as immigration. >> it has as much to do with a skilled worker or unskilled workers being paid half the weight in another country and coming. being paid twice the wage. there's competition regardless. i would hope our aspirations would be greater than protecting low-skilled americans in perpetuity from competition bacon not avoid and instead building their skills. that should be of the objectives -- should be the objective. >> if mr. greenspan is correct, then even as illegal and unauthorized workers, this community made a significant contribution to the growth of our economy and that contribution only goes up when they become legal and authorized, correct?

>> yes. >> i just want to clear up one thing. i'm looking at your wikipedia page. it says that you oppose " those in the racial grievance industry who talk incessantly about the slightest of racial disparities whether real or imagined." is that a quotation of yours or of somebody else that is being put into that article? craig moe all snow wikipedia is infallible, -- >> we all know that wikipedia is installed. i do disagree with those who count on the basis of race instead of being colorblind. >> is this a quotation of yours? >> i don't recall. it does not sound like me. >> i'm sorry. my time is up, gentlemen.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate hearing. i appreciate all my colleagues that have different views and this is something america needs to work through. but let's talk about where we are going as a nation. in 1983 i was a young captain in air force. in 2013 at, by south carolina standards, i'm a middle-aged senator. in 2043, i will be 87, if i live that long and if i can follow the senator strom thurmond model, i will have two terms left in the senate and i will miss most of you all. [laughter] might bee around -- around, but the rest of you, i will talk to your families. for those who are around in 2043, here's what i want you to look at. if nothing changes, by 2043, medicare and medicaid will take gdp defunct.

>> the current trajectory is we will be close to half. >> 80% of gdp. how much to be put in revenue today? >> normally, 80% if we are lucky. >> here's the deal. in 2043, if we don't do something about medicare and medicaid, if it will take all the money we collected in taxes today plus 2% just to pay for those programs. how can that be? 10,000 baby boomers per day are retiring. in 1950, there were 16.5 workers for every social security recipient. 23rd, there will be 2.1. mr. douglas holtz-eakin, your point is unless we have a massive baby boom, the numbers are going the wrong direction. >> absolutely. >> how do you supplement? when ias born in 1955, there were 16 workers for every retiree. today there are basically 3. in 20 years or less there will be 2. we're just -- where does the

work force come from to keep the american economy going? would you agree with me it comes from immigration? >> was certain extent. but this is also a matter of entitlement reform. >> its a matter of entitlement reform and a matter of workforce. >> that's true, senator. >> two people cannot do what 16 people. it's going the wrong direction. you're right. we need entitlement reform. but if we also don't do immigration reform to access illegal labor, we cannot get to where we want to go as a nation in terms of economic growth. displacing american workers, here's the one thing i agree with senator sessions about it. i don't want if foreign workers program, under the h1 low-skilled or high skilled guest worker, to displace american worker was willing to do the job. if in this bill we have a requirement to advertise the job

at a competitive wage. we had a knock down drag out about what that was. are you familiar with the agricultural industry? >> i'm not an expert, but i do know some things. >> i think senator feinstein is. why is it most people in the agricultural industry are hispanic? >> i think it's because hispanics are illegal immigrants working in the agricultural industry and substandard wages. >> let's assume that for a moment if we made them all legal, they would receive the laws.ts of wage and hour >> many of them would. gregg's you believe there's a dynamic in america that no matter how much you advertise a job, there are certain areas of the economy that you will not find an american worker? >> i don't know that. >> i can tell you i do. i can tell you i do, living in south carolina.

when you go to the meat packing plant, it's no accident that everybody in that plant is hispanic. when you go to the peach farms, there is no accident that everybody there is from somewhere else. not saying people in south carolina are lazy. i am saying that there are certain parts of this economy you are not quantify and an american worker no matter what you do, no matter how much you advertise, unless you just want to put yourself out of business. that is a reality that is uncomfortable to hear, but is the god's truth. in the future, and want to test my proposition by making sure that all these jobs in agriculture, all these jobs in meatpacking, godown list of jobs that are really tough, that they are going to be advertised at a higher wages than they are today. and we will see who's right or wrong. the you believe it's possible for a country to have a welfare program that suppresses labor participation?

when you add up all the benefits, you make more not working than you do working? >> aunt sophie. >> you agree, peter? it's absolutely. i agree. >> and you agree, peter? >> absolutely. >> i want to thank all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for being here today. nd the two witnesses prearranged their schedule in about 20 minutes notice. that means a lot to the committee. one of the reasons that we stream this live is we have had other hearings on immigration, so as many people as possible could see it. e-mail traffic is coming through. people are watching. americans are concerned about this, even in a week when there

is horrible, terrible tragic news that seems to be overriding everything else. >> senator acorn had to go to texas for that explosion. -- senator cornyn. there are demands we all have. >> and some are inescapable. i know that the senator is concerned about that. it's one of the terrible things i'm talking about. "the fighter him, i would be doing precisely what he's doing. s him't think anybody fault on that. senator? >> thank you, mr. chairman. my focus here today is on the economic consequences of immigration reform. senator hatch already mentioned the bill we did together, along with a number of other people on this committee called i squared, which makes it easier to bring

in a number of professional employees for jobs that are open now but also a number of economic studies show how that adds more american jobs. when you bring over an inventor or someone who has special skills, the mystery of this country is that they have invented things and come up with new ideas that employ hundreds of thousands of people. that's our focus. my first comment is just what do you seen as three of the biggest economic benefits of immigration reform even beyond the issue i just raised? core, the billhe is imperfect as it's written. but it makes the fundamental decision to move away from a system that is driven by family reunification, asylum refugee considerations toward an economically based merit system. that is a very healthy development for a country that needs to have a larger population in the future, have a

skilled labor force, compete globally. that's the overwhelming benefit of the bill. inside that, the emphasis on some emphasisthe stem provisions, making them more responsive to economic conditions is a good thing. provisions.the stem having a system that has a jim demint exit at exit security system as well as economic conditions is a good thing. a variety of economic legislation in this are good on balance. >> i want america to win. >> me too. craig huey about how the u.s. is not using immigration policy effectively and as many other countries are to improve economic growth. what countries did you see as doing a good job? numbers, look at the it's in my written testimony, under core visas are for

economic reasons at the moment. given the paramount need for economic growth, that cuts across our ability to deal with all our policy challenges, those will all be easier with faster economic growth. focusing on that makes more sense. other countries, we have charts in the written testimony, have a high percentage. other countries that have made reforms recently like the united kingdom looking to do this. if you look at the countries that are struggling right now and likely to fail, dejapan. europe, the exception is germany, which has undertaken a particular percentage of turkish labor. we have to recognize economic reality and adjust our policies. >> this goes simultaneously with training our own workers and having more and more kids going into science, engineering, technology, and math. we cannot just do one thing

without the other. one of the details of our bill that is included in the gang of eight proposal is providing work authorization to the spouses of high skilled workers. i also see this as a women's issue. and an economic issue, because many of the spouses can make great contributions to our economy. can you? comment on this you >> if you look at the past several decades, one of the overriding impact in the u.s. is in the entry of women to labor force. that's been one of the sources of increased growth in the u.s., probably the most important the flows of immigration by adding that second kick of both genders participate. that will allow us to continue something we have seen for the past decades. >> we have worked very hard to increase visa times for tourism

visas. we've done good work with the state department in advertising our country. in the gang of eight proposal is something i worked on with senator schumer and others that would modernize the visa work program and reduce visa were times even more. in 2012, international visitors added billions to the u.s. economy. we have lost 16% of international tourism. for every point we have lost its 167,000 jobs in america. can you talk about the economic benefits of increasing the number of tourists? and why this is important also include this is not the first thing people think of when it about immigration because it's just tourist visas? >> post-decree 9/11, the need to have an enhanced security regime had big impact on travel and tourism and we lost a lot of the economic benefits. you can go to the destination

cities and see the impact. the question going for it is can we marry solid economics in that area with a secure entry/exit visa system? that is something i hope could happen. >> point is other countries including some of the ones you mentioned, have good security measures as we dew point for these kinds of tourist visas, but how can we do it more efficiently without changing any of the security screens? >> yes. >> thank you very much. you, mr. chairman. and thanks to both of our witnesses for joining us today. virtually everyone agrees that our immigration system is broken and that it needs to be reformed. for prolonged it made its comparatively easy for people to cross our borders and stay here-- here -- for far too long we have made it a comparatively easy for people to cross our borders and stay here. we don't faced just one big

immigration challenge. it is a complex puzzle with dozens of interconnected pieces. just like puzzles we all put together as children, some of the pieces cannot be incorporated until others are in place already. given this unavoidable reality, it's clear we are not going to able to fix our entire immigration system overnight, nor could we hope to analyze even a small fraction of the most critical issues in one or two inches before this committee. the process of reform will have to be considered and implemented in stages over the course of many years. clearly, the challenges we face are hard and will take time to address. so it's all the more important that we begin this process immediately. i applaud the efforts of my colleagues who have worked hard to develop a proposal that's before us today. theirs is been an enormous undertaking and i appreciate their dedication to making progress toward this kind of lasting reform that we need.

today i look forward to discussing a few key issues that are part of the enormous immigration puzzle. i've introduced several pieces of immigration reform legislation, and least one of which has been mentioned several times today has been incorporated into this bill. expressutset, i must two primary concerns with the current bill and with the committee oppose the current path. like many americans, i am weary of trying to do this all in one fell scope's. good policy really flows from massive bills that seek to fix every problem in a single sweeping piece of legislation. legislators actually understand everything in such bills and no one can pretend to comprehend all the moving pieces and likely outcomes and results. such wide-ranging legislation inevitably produces unintended consequences. especially when it comes to our immigration system. some reforms are necessary

prerequisites for other subsequent reforms. it makes little sense to make decisions about later stages before we know -- before the essential foundations are even in place. it's like trying to put the roof on a new house before raising the walls that will hold it up. in particular, this bill seeks to address a 11 million before other preconditions are actually satisfied. it treats the 11 million as if they are a single monolithic group on here for the same reason and under the same circumstances, which they are not. trying to resolve every issue all at once is also politically problematic. there is broad consensus on some necessary reforms, but others are highly controversial. we ought not to hijack common sense and essential measures by linking them to contentious once. my second concern is with the committee's process thus far. reforms of this magnitude and importance deserve more than a couple a hastily scheduled

hearings. this bill has -- was not even made available until wednesday morning. given the unusually and unnecessarily compressed schedule, there has been no opportunity for senators, or witnesses to read or digest the substance of the bill. there is no we as a committee could possibly be prepared this morning to debate more than a fraction of this massive bill. it would be impossible to have a meaningful discussion with rigorous analysis under such circumstances. witnesses were asked to submit testimony before they could have read the entire bill. even with the help of committee staff, who have worked to the night in preparation, of us can say we understand each provision and how all the pieces fit together. not even close. that is why i favor a sensible

approach. republicans and democrats share much in common. they agree on a lot of common ground on most of the immediate issues. on central elements like border security, employment verification, a guest worker programs, and high-skilled immigration, we are in agreement, and could enact significant reforms in these areas. we should not delay progress in these areas because we have differences in a few others. each of these issues is complex and we should have robust and substantive debate over the best way to structure each before. i look forward to beginning that discussion today. and thank you for your participation. >> the key, center early. senator frank nen? >> i am sorry secretary napolitano cannot be here today, but i want to take her and the department of homeland security, the fbi, atf, the boston police the party, all the professionals who are working on

this tragedy in boston. almost 44nd i met i years ago at a freshman mixer in copley square. ur hearts, all minnesotans' arts, are with the people in boston. turning to the subject of our hearing, i want to think the senators on this committee for their works, senator schumer, senator graham, senator durbin, senator flake, senator feinstein, senator hatch. need a that we comprehensive approach to this. i do not think you can do this piecemeal. everything is complex and related and that is why you have to do -- to fix this deeply broken system, you need a

comprehensive approach. i think we have had a broken system. it has been a drag on our economy. mr. holt's-eakin, thank you for your testimony. and i did it will help minnesota businesses and families alike. i want to think the senators who ever done this, getting us as far as we have gotten. eakin, one of the most things i have most pleased about is what it does for agriculture, particularly in mary -- minnesota. minnesota is one of the biggest dairy producers and our nation. dairy farmers have not been able to access the work force they have needed for years to rid the one program that allows farmers to get guest workers is open only to seasonal workers, and you cannot milk cows seasonally. getcould, but you would

very uncomfortable cows. i have been calling for this -- anyway. enough said. >> i used to be chairman of the senate agriculture committee. you are bringing back to my roots. >> vermont has a very great here-producing culture. -producing culture. i'm glad the gang of eight felt the same way. court testimony to its on the issue of productivity. it seems having access to eight dependable legal work force has got to be a boom for various parts of our agricultural industry. what you think? >> ed herbst to manage deficiencies which will help over all productivity. it is important to recognize that what i think of as skills

when i look on a piece of paper does not matter house the market determines skills. where are the capabilities but we have learned that people who can run welders and skilled tradesmen, are in short supply. it is a highly skilled viable profession. the more we have in immigration reform that reflects the reality and responses to it, the better our of our workforce will be and higher productivity will be. >> i believe our broken system has been a drag on the economy, and senator graham illustrated very well be interesting demographic arguments that you make in your testimony. have as a lot of us boomers are about to retire or some have retired. so i want to underscore that point. i want to ask about the economic sponsor their partners as

residency in this country, as a matter of fairness and an impact of treating sang-sex economic positive proof, from an economic point of view, economic couples differently under immigration laws. productivity is productivity, and you want to bring all the two large companies in opportunities into the marketplace. the provisions of the bill i am minnesota, carlson and medtronic not familiar with, and the says the current law hurt our magnitudes, i cannot guess that. ability to recruit and retain >> thank you both for your top talent. testimony. they are part of a coalition, >> a thank you. senator flake? uniting american families act, >> thank you, and think of reporting this hearing. and a bill will give committed -- holtz- eakin, st. essex couples the same immigration opportunities as other couples. i was recently told of another eakin, congress took up this minnesota company, a smaller issue, heritage foundation came company, that will likely have up with a study with a headline to shut down because the owners, that this would cost the taxpayers $2.60 trillion over a same-6 couple, will not be some time. able to stay in the country. that study has now been this point i would like it to enter into the record a letter discounted by quite a number of from the 30 companies that organizations. i know you have looked at that. compromise -- that comprise this what are your feelings on a

coalition. is that all right, mr. chairman? study like that that purports i would like to enter a letter from 30 companies in support of these kinds of costs to the your bill. taxpayers? >> i will resist temptation to iter >> those circumstances, turn this into a graduate seminar, but i think the top line is i have reservations is quite all right, and of course we will be delighted to about that particular heritage have it. i know everybody will want to study. the foundation has done a lot of read it before that date is out. good work, but in terms of that thank you. >> ok, thank you. exercise, it leaves out things that i think our most important, to finish this the dynamic effects in my point. testimony and the study i did. speakask mr. holtz-eakin heritage has the capability of doing that analysis, and i would hope they would bring something to it. like that out if the opportunity do we not miss an opportunity to arose. the second thing i worry about strengthen our economy by not citizens togt in that study is the basic design does not shed light on immigration reform. there is nothing about that study that says what happens as a result of passing legislation, so it does not informed decisions that congress might face, and i would like to see studies designed before and after reform. the last i will not the labor,

the comparisons and that study are between their -- a very low- skill immigrants and all of americans, including by implication bill gates, myself, , whenever.ca you can anticipate they outcome of that comparison. about the were made number of immigrants coming in who are regularized who then take welfare benefits. can you speak to that? >> again, it was not tied to a particular reform exercise, and i think you have to be careful about the assumptions you make. we know the labor force participation of first- generation immigrants is higher than the native-born. you go to the second generation where people worry about public programs, more college degrees in second-degeneration than

native-born, more pressure to greece, higher rates of labor force participation. among those, -- it is not the case that program participation as higher than in the native- board population on the whole. >> thank you. you mentioned that you believe the number of illegal immigrants currently here exerted downward pressure on wages. is that accurate? >> that is correct. and use a regular rising that population would still have some downward pressure on wages? >> that is correct. thes it accurate to say -- alternative would be continue in the current path of allowing these illegal immigrants to work in the work force, exerting that downward pressure, or have some plan to deport them or take them out of the work force. do you see that as a reasonable measure to somehow remove them

from the work force short of some kind of reform like this? >> i do not think those are the alternatives. there are other alternatives trick is not a question between regularize asian. there are a lot of intermediate steps that the committee may want to take a look at. one of the things is i think and i have not looked at all 900 pages, but taking steps to ensure that it is difficult for roke employers to employ illegal immigrants or employ anybody outside the former of existing law would be very salutary. we can do that. there are a number of conditions we can employ short of deportations, but if we do that that will get to far along to the process of making sure everybody in america it is paid the way they're supposed to be paid, not working under substandard conditions. >> you are aware of testimony from groups like the group that

you use represent, the national association of manufacturers, saying they cannot find the skilled labour they need among our work force now and that the economy would benefit some with some kind of program to allow others to come in. you concede any economic benefit like the doctor does to this kind of reform? >> i would yielddo on number of issues related to the economic benefits. however, there is a significant downward pressure on a whole host of occupational categories by regularization. that is unequivocal. i think we have had at least two hearings before the civil rights commission where there was at least near unanimity that that is the case. i do think that we should have some type of immigration reform. i think the liberation must be had with respect to do that any considered fashion so that there is a group of people, and especially low-skilled

americans, who are not thrown under the bus. i hear discussion about benefits to the united states economy. but most skilled americans are significant parts of that economy, and they are being excluded from this discussion. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> like all of you, i appreciate the time you have spent with me in the briefings before we set these hearings. i know you have had to juggle your schedules to do that, but i thought it was a productive meeting. democratsck by the and republicans, struck by the complete absence of partisanship in that meeting. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i am pleased that the gang of eight has reached an agreement and produced a bill that will overhaul the current immigration

system in ways that will provide help to millions of individuals and families have had and the three of the gang of eight members are members of this committee, and i thank them, senators schumer, durbin, flake, and chairman lee, so many other ch atrs, feinstein, a hat, had tremendous input into this bill. dr. holtz-eakin there are, economic considerations throughout this bill. esther chairman, spend some time and focus on families in my remarks, and i start by saying the family unity is very much a part of economic success for immigrants. family unity issues, economic success, economic vitality,

these are not either or propositions. those two should go together in my view. this bill will help some families to reunite, but for others, especially from asian countries, it will dramatically restrict the ability of families to reunite with certain loved ones. which has been the basis of our immigration system since 1965. while i understand compromises had to be made, i believe that in some areas this bill is more restrictive than necessary, and of course i will join my colleagues in continuing to improve this bill. s744 mistress the sinking category and replaces it with a merit-based point system. i believe the new system could exclude many immigrant family members from reuniting with their u.s. citizen siblings. this is troubling, because

siblings are an integral part of family structure. they support and help each other find jobs, provide both an emotional and financial support, and care for each other's families. in addition, many times a sibling may be your only family member. for example, i recently met a woman named nadine whose brother is her only remaining family member. they are extremely close and have been separated for many years. i'm concerned that cases like nadine's will no longer have a meaningful opportunity to petition for their sibling. i would also like to see improvement in the family system to include lbgt families, brought up by my colleague, senator franken, and the children of filipino world war ii veterans, and we are joined at this hearing by some of our filipino world war ii veterans

who have been separated from the children. mr. chairman, i look forward to continue discussions and the opportunity to improve this legislation that all -- legislation. they're already been comments on the visa program, which i support, and i yield the remainder of my time. aycock. >> thank you, and i think --erybody who has spent e who have been here. this has been a good hearing. we are arranging the times for secretary napolitano to be here. i think all of us realize with what is going on by the secretary of homeland security, is at homeland security. ongoingi received briefings of the circumstances there, should be. i thank everybody for taking the time, and we will have another hearing on monday.

day forrranging another secretary the pot,. i think the two witnesses who came here to rearrange their schedules on short notice. appreciate it is what makes the committee work. i would also note for the record that as you go back over your notes on what to do at to any of your answers, i will keep the record open for that. we're not playing a game of -- are just trying to have a possible -- the best possible record. i think both parties for being here. we stand in recess until the call the chair. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> the committee wrapping up their hearing on the immigration proposal released yesterday by the so-called bipartisan gang of eight. you may have heard the chairman gaveled out the subject to the call of the chair. that is because janet a paula a ton of did not participate in this hearing this morning. she participated in a briefing at the white house on the above elements in the boston marathon bombing investigation, among the others participating. the fbi director, the attorney general, and others at the white house. at the start of that hearing, this hearing on immigration, the senator leahy and senator grassley had addressed the absence of janet the paula tunnel. here is what they had to say. >> as you know there is a great deal of going on in massachusetts. i hope everybody can well

secretary why the napolitano will not be here and we will reschedule her -- i was talking to senator feinstein, she but she was saying and i totally agree how proud we are of how law- enforcement is responding. of anistressed to hear officer been killed and another just critically wounded, as we are of all the people who were injured or killed in the marathon. i see at least one person who runs marathons in the audience and others, as my daughter and a

son do. it should have been a joyous, mosts occasion, as marathons' all are for spectators and participants. chairman, side, mr. we understand the secretary cannot be here, and we feel that she is doing exactly what she should be doing, and we will have an opportunity when things settle down to question her. thewe also appreciate opportunity to talk about immigration, particularly in light of all that is happening in massachusetts right now and over the last week. i know the people of boston and watertown are in everybody's thoughts this morning. we're here trying to understand why these events have occurred. it is hard to understand there are people in this world that want to do americans harm, said this hearing is an opportunity

to refocus on the issue is on hand and the importance of remaining vigilant and secure in our homeland. >> some tweeds responding to the immigration proposal and the events in and around boston. i think not. time for a moratorium on imported terrorism. macon, you seem to be hiding. being shown that your policy is a failure could be the cause of, i am guessing. the suspects in the boston marathon bombing killed police officer and hurled explosives during a car chase. one of the brothers, dzhokhar tsarnaev, has died overnight, and his brother, tamerlan died

overnight. the bthhokharaev, is still lose, setting down transportations and schools in and around boston. we will keep updated with news and briefings as they are warranted. the news of the morning was also part of the briefing at the state department. secretary john kerry meeting with mexican foreign minister talked about the boston marathon investigation. this is about teen minutes. -- this is about 15 minutes. >> good morning, everybody. -- excuse me -- allergy season -- before we begin i want to say as a father

and grandfather, my thoughts are of course and my home town right now in boston, where events are still unfolding in the entire city. the entire city is in lock down. we continue to learn every moment about the terror attack on monday and the pursuit of justice that is following it. it is fair to say that this entire week we have been in a direct confrontation with evil, nd i want to congratulate and thank all law-enforcement authorities for the job they have been doing on behalf of our citizens. in the past few days we have seen the best and we have seen the worst. all of usthe best of want to focus on. like everyone, we will keep watching and we will await word from the law enforcement officers before commenting further. me and huge pleasure for

an important moment to welcome one of our most important partners, our close neighbor and our friend, and i want to welcome my friend the foreign secretary. one of the first phone calls i made when i became secretary of state was to jose, and i am honored to see him here today. we share an almost water together. alma mater an together. we obviously share much more than an alma mater. the bus are privileged to represent our export their countries, and we share remarkable friendship and a very, very strong partnership that is growing stronger all the time. for generations, we have lived side by side as families and neighbors sharing geography and sharing common interests and

schering hopes and dreams. the foreign secretary and i share a firm commitment to the unique components of our relationship, and we share a common vision her what we can achieve through evert -- even greater cooperation and partnership. we share a french and an open line of communication starting with, as i said, the earliest conversations that i had when i assumed this office. we intend to remain in close contact with each other. we talked about that today. we have a lot of things to continue to cooperate on. we want to increase the economic growth of both of our countries, we want to expand economic opportunity for our people, and we want to provide greater security for the people of the united states and of mexico. our country's share of one of the most successful and interconnected economic

partnerships in the world. it is based on mutual respect and share the responsibility. bilateral trade amounted to nearly $500 billion last year. that is more than four times what it was only 20 years ago. hi-level economic delegations have already been meeting in the course of this year. . .

tnkhere, we wilbe able to solidify some of the things we're talking about here today. so welcome to washington. and thank you very, very much for the extraordinary partnership that we share. >> thank you. thank you, sir. >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. allow me first to express, once again, the solidarity of

the people and government of the people of mexico, with the united states, for the horrific incidents that took place monday in boston. with that, you have our hearts and our prayers. i also want once again to send condolences to victims of the explosion in the town of west, texas, i want to take this opportunity this morning to commend the fbi, the law enforcement community, the boston police for the outstanding work they are facing with this issue that has been handled in and heroic fashion. secretary kerry and myself have just concluded a very productive meeting. we have identified priorities for our work in the coming weeks and months on many of the key components of a broad bilateral agenda. we've touched upon education, investment, infrastructure, border security. we talked about importance of

cooperation. we talked and identified and welcomed many of the issues that are now being discussed in the u.s. congress. we welcomed the introduction of the immigration reform bill in the u.s. senate. we welcomed the fact that constant debate will be constructive and what can be achieved is relevant for mexico as well. mexico and the united states have a strong relationship. $1 million per minute, that is a number -- to contributes to the health of the relationship. mexico is a most important export market for 22 of the 50 united states states. mexico and the u.s. -- the u.s. exports to mexico, more than it does to china and

japan combined. the u.s. exports to mexico more than it does to many european countries taken ago a group, and i think that the success that we can tell in terms of trade is something that should be built upon, so that we can look at the relationships from the north american perspective and in that perspective, find uncommon answers to the global problems, problems common to our bilateral regions. i can think of no better partner to work with than secretary kerry. his personal leadership has long been recognized from security to climate change, democracy, immigration, human rights. as i told him a few minutes ago, the bilateral projects, both regionally and global issues i think will be in good standing and we are very, very grateful for that relationship and for the work that we will do together.

as you all know, in a couple of weeks, we will receive president obama in mexico. we are honored by his decision to travel to our country to meet with our president. this will be the second face-to-face conversation between them in just over five months. a testament to the commitment of our vast economic agenda, to deepen our communities, to provide security to citizens that have instructed both of us, our governments, to continue working together as responsible neighbors. thank you, secretary kerry. >> thank you very much, i appreciate it. >> [inaudible] what does the boston attack say about the threat to the u.s. proposed by czech nan extremists, have you been in touch with russia or others

on the matter? wouldn't the russians see this as a validation of their arguments on chechnya and maybe syria regarding terrorism? then just lastly, what role did state specifically play into the investigations of the bombings, thank you? >> brad, looking at this point. law enforcement officers are carrying out an ongoing investigation and frankly, there are critical stages here, and it would be entirely inappropriate for me to be commenting on the tick tock around the larger issues outside of it. the fbi is the lead entity with respect to this investigation, and they will lay out the details of contacts and information at the appropriate moment. the important thing right now is the president has said, we're going to find those responsible and bring them to justice. we are part of the way there. and the president intends to finish that job.

>> [inaudible question] >> i'm not going to get into speculation. i'm not going to get into hypotheticals. let's see what the fbi says at the appropriate time. the one thing i will say is terror is terror and this underscores the importance of all of us maintaining vigilance and cooperating together internationally. that's part of what we're talking about here. terror anywhere in the world against any country is unacceptable, and we need to continue to stand up and fight against it in a way that we are. it strengthens, actually, my resolve and my sense that we're on the right back, but there's more we can do, and we're going to continue to do it. president obama has made this a critical component of his

foreign policy, and obviously, this just emphasizes that. >> [inaudible question] >> the mexicoan government has expressed its interest in that agenda. in that regard, bringing president obama to mexico, what programs can we expect along the road and secretary kerry, -- >> [inaudible] >> some countries in latin american countries were on the back burner for several years. is it your express intent to reach out to the region? >> we have agreed to enlarge our agenda, and we are going to be talking about initiatives that have to do with high level engagement into our economic dialogue. we will be talking and find a mechanism to talk in terms of

the vocation, research and innovation. so those issues and structures around them will be on the agenda, and the talks, initially discussed by president obama and president nieto. >> the answer is profoundly, yes, we do intend, i intend to, personally. and, in fact, i had intended to try to travel to the region next week, but because of the events this week, and because of some other things happening, i've had to postpone that just temporarily, and i mean temporarily. i will be getting to the region very shortly, president obama is traveling to the region, president obama feels very strongly and has asked me to focus on how we can strengthen our economic partnerships in latin american and central america, and i intend to do that -- in latten america and central america and i intend to do that. we talked today, at the beginning of my conversation, very first thing out of my mouth is we don't want to define this relationship with mexico and other countries in

the context of security or counter narcotics trafficking. we want to define it much larger in the context of our citizens' economic needs and our capacity to do more on the economic frontier. i'm convinced that we're going to grow that relationship in terms of jobs. we talked about ways to link up, perhaps, ultimately with the transatlantic investment, trade partnership program. in the long run, it may be possible to find ways to strengthen both of us through those kinds of initiatives. and, of course, mexico is a partner in the transpacific partnership, so we are already growing this relationship, we're going to continue to grow it, i think it needs to be, frankly, the defining issue of our relationship together zero our commitment to democracy and human rights. >> thank you very much.

thank you all very, very much. appreciate it. >> we will be back at the state department at 2:15, secretary kerry releasing the annual human rights report. bloomberg news reporting the secretary has just arrived at the white house for a briefing, an update on the boston marathon bombing investigation. this as the man on your screen, joe tsarnaev is on the loose after a shootout during which his brother was called, tamerlan tsarnaev. transportation and schools are shut down throughout the boston area. we will keep you updated as warranted. >> earlier we showed you the immigration hearing with the judiciary committee yesterday. eight senators who recently joined forces to author bipartisan immigration legislation held a news conference on capitol hill. they talked about border security and the path to

citizenship. all eight senators spoke. the briefing is 50 minutes. >> good afternoon, everybody. we are here to announce that eight senators, from opposite sides of the political aisle, are coming together on a common sense immigration reform proposal that we believe can pass the senate. i want to thank my seven other colleagues here today. each one of us is strong willed, each one of us has strong beliefs, differing beliefs, but if you would have seen that room, in any of our 24 meetings, and seen everyone argue strongly, but then, come together to

realize that we had to pass a bill, and not everyone was going to get each thing he wanted, it was a sight that would give you some faith in the future of our democracy, especially on a morning like this. now, we all know that our immigration system is broken and it's time to get to work on fixing it. immigration reform is vital to securing our borders. jump starting our economy. and ensuring fuller access to that great american dream. the current status quo on immigration makes no sense. we turn away people from entering the country who could create thousands of jobs and let people crossing our borders who take away jobs. our approach is balanced. the border security triggers are strong, but achievable. the path to citizenship is tough, but it is accessible. yes, our bill does secure the

border first, but it treats the situation of those living in the shadows as an equally urgent priority. this is by design. we believe that americans will support sensible solutions to dealing with the undocumented and future legal immigrants, but only if they are convinced there will not be future waves of illegal immigrants. when the 11 million who are here come out of the shadows it will not only improve their lives and their families' lives, it will strengthen our country and its economy. in fact, conservative economist douglas holtz-eakin has found that immigration reform will save taxpayers $2.7 trillion. we want this legislation to meet the highest possible standards of openness and transparency. to that end, the bill has been online since tuesday night. we will not begin markup until the first week in may.

giving everyone three weeks to read this bill and prepare amendments. chairman leahy has pledged an extensive markup, and the judiciary committee includes some of the leading opponents of immigration reform who will have their ample opportunity to challenge our ideas. this ensures the bill will emerge from committee battle-tested. then we anticipate a full and fair debate on the floor. senator reid has proposed -- has pledged to take it up no later than june. as with any compromise, no one got everything they wanted. there were moments when it looked like an agreement would not come. >> realizing the high stakes, the business community and labor rose to the occasion. when tom donahue from the chamber and rich trumka from

the afl-cio got together on a friday inhtate march and signed their names to the effort, it became clear an agreement was possible. other stakeholders came together as well. many of them are here today and we thank you all for helping us make this dream become a reality. >> [applause] so if you're wondering why we are confident we can be successful at passing immigration reform this time around, look right behind me. these folks here. an unprecedented coalition has formed in favor of immigration reform, growers, farm workers, high tech business leaders, the faith community, some of the most well-known conservative activists in washington and some of the most progressive. powerful outside forces have helped defeat certain other initiatives in washington, but on immigration, the opposite is proving true. i am convinced this issue

will not fall victim to the usual partisan gridlock. and we are mindful that we approach our task at a moment when the public has never been more fed up with congress. but in a week when disillusionment with politics is being acutely felt, this bipartisan breakthrough offers a degree of hope. despite strong personalities, and even stronger disagreements on many issues, we met in the middle for the common good. the bill is proof the art of political compromise is not dead. so in conclusion, today is just the beginning of our voyage. it will be long and arduous. there will be perils we can't even anticipate. but we start off with optimism, because this bipartisan agreement gives us a sturdy ship to ride out the stormy seas ahead. lastly, i'd like to mention

someone who could not be here, but who is on the minds of all of us today. the late ted kennedy. he is a hero to many of us on both sides of the aisle, and especially on this issue. in many ways, our work picks up where he left off. and now i'd like to turn the podium over to ted's long time partner on this issue, a man who has become a great personal friend of mine through these negotiations, john mccain. >> [applause] >> thank you chuck, and thank you to all of you. i want to, obviously, express my deep appreciation to all of my seven colleagues. it is well known in the senate that i'm not the easiest guy to get along with but i must say, they've put up with my trand rums and

they've put up with a lot and i want to say thank you to all of you for really doing something that america deserves. to paraphrase churchill, this is not the end of the process, but it's the end of the beginning. there's a long and difficult road ahead. committee hearings, markups, open amendments will be offered to the bill. some will be intended to improve it, some will be offered in hope of killing it. none of us expect the bill to be id -- the senate ultimately votes on to be identical to the one that we introduced today, but we're all united in our determination that it is the end of theo that at end of the day, it remains a fair, comprehensive and practical solution to a difficult problem that most americans can support and that stands a good chance of passing the house, and being signed into law by the president of the united states. the legislation isn't perfect

there are provisions most if not all senators can support. some will appeal to one side more than the other. no one will like every provision in the bill. neither should anyone oppose every provision. the legislation we're offering is comprehensive and a workable solution to our broken immigration system, the piecemeal responses have not and cannot repair. the status quo threatened our security, damages our economy, disregards the rule of law, and neglects our humanitarian responsibilities a problem of that magnitude that affects so many of our interests will never be easy to address but never more necessary to address either and its resolution cannot be achieved by means other than political compromise and consensus and resolve to not make the perfect be the enemy of the good and that's what we have tried to do. we've agreed on provisions to regain control of our borders

and protect the safety of communities along the border and the security of our nation. we have addressed labor needs of a growing and competitive economy with a workable guest worker policy and sensible expansion of the h1b visa programs. we've enforced the rule of law by making it more difficult for employers to hire people who come here illegally. we've confronted the reality of defacto amnesty for the 11 million or more people who came here illegally by proposing a lengthy path to citizenship that doesn't place lawful immigrants at a disadvantage and is contingent on doing everything possible to make our border secure and discourage future waves of illegal immigration. finally, we have recognized that most people who cross our borders illegally or overstay their visas have done so for the same reason

that attracted other immigrants here to find economic opportunity and a better life for their families and to live in a society that values human dignity. we cannot sanction their violation of our immigration laws. neither can we continue to have people desperate for a better life be exploited by unscrupulous human traffickers, abused by violent criminals, and left to die in our deserts. yes, we offer a path to citizenship to people who didn't come here legally. they are here, and realistically, there is nothing we can do that will induce them all to return to their countries of origin. many of them make valuable contributions to our society and will provide even more if they're brought out of the shadows and in compliance with our laws, and we are a nation with a conscience that

can't tolerate the terrible violations of human rights that our current dysfunctional immigration system is unable to prevent. as i said, it is a lengthy path. it doesn't precede securing or border to enforce our laws or supplant them. we have made it harder to be here illegally. we have done our best to resolve the many different parts of this complicated problem. we welcome suggestions during the debate and amendment process. we will oppose only those amendments intended to prevent a comprehensive solution from passing, and thereby perpetuate our current failed immigration system. there is no greater satisfaction in this job than in working with members from both parties in a good faith

effort to serve the nation's interests. i thank my colleagues here for the privilege. >> [applause] >> >> thank you very much to chuck and john. i can remember one of the earliest meetings of this group when we started talking about what the bottom line is what is nonnegotiable. why are we here? i can remember the democrats saying whatever we write, it has to be fair and protect american workers. i can recall the republicans saying, whatever we write, we have to be firm in protecting our border. the democrats said the bottom line is the path to legalization and citizenship for these people living in the shadows. and the republicans came back and said yes. but they had to earn their way on that path. pay the taxes. pay the fines. have a job. learn english. it's not going to be easy. they have to earn their way.

those were the basic principles that started this conversation. i think there were about 24 meetings that took place as we came together sometime for ours at -- for hours at great length to talk about the issues part of this 800 page plus bill. this isn't perfect but it's a good faith, common sense approach to fixing a badly broken immigration system. and there are several reasons why we are here and why i'm here. first, the american people want us to do something. the notion that we would end this process with the same broken immigration system is just unacceptable. we believe on a bipartisan basis we've come up with a good approach, one that will make this country safer and more productive. but second, i want to say a word about an issue that touches my heart. because it is one that i've been working on for more than 12 years. and that is the dream act. this is an issue which means the world to me. and to so many young people

across this country. and i want to thank my colleagues here, because that evening that we set aside for the dream act was a pretty short meeting. everybody said it's time. it is time. and the reason that it's time is not because just it's a good idea, and there is wisdom behind it, but because we have all come to know the dreamers. those young people brought to this country by their parents with no decision in the process, those young people who are now stepping forward. remember, they spent most of their young lives being counseled, keep your head down, don't sign anything. if the police show up, go quietly to the exit because you can be deported in a second. but having learned that as children, they came to realize that to be part of this political process, they had to do exactly the opposite. they had to stand up at great personal risk and introduce themselves to america and tell their stories let me tell you three of the stories represented today. gabby pacheco, came to the

united states from ecuador at the age of seven. she was the highest ranked junior rotc student in her high school. she served as president of florida's junior college student government. three years ago, gabby and three other dreamers walked from miami, florida to washington, d.c. 1500 miles to build support for the dream act. along the way, they were joined by hundreds of young people. some dreamers and some just young people and supporters. they called the trip the trail of dreams. gabby, thank you. >> [applause] >> and tomu, brought to nigeria as a child, in 2002, she graduated from a prestigious university in virginia with a degree in chemical engineering. it's been 10 years since she graduated. she has yet to work a day as a chemical engineer because she is undocumented.

thank you for being here today. and loretta praley. loretta. brought to the united states from peru, graduated from quinnipiac university with a b.a. in political science and sociology, started the connecticut students for a dream, statewide organization, advocating for the dream act and now the policy and advocacy act for united we dream, the country's largest organization of young immigrants, 35u8 of these young women have dedicated themselves full-time to passing a comprehensive immigration reform, not just to help themselves, but to help mom and dad and brothers and sisters. when i look at these three i see the courage, hard work and determination that makes america, this nation of immigrants, the greatest on earth. someday in the not-too-distant future it's my prayer, when our immigration reform law becomes the law of the land that i can attend the nationalization ceremonies and watch these young people

cntryhat theirf allegiance home, on that day,ca will be a bett a strr counkou. >> i think it would be appropriate to refer to this as a schumer-mccain bill because these two senators really started this process and they have the smallest egos among us. >> >> we have union bosses, chamber representatives. we're either going to get a bill or have one hell of a fight. why do we have 11 million illegal immigrants. more people couldn't get here for whatever reason.

america is an idea. no one owns it. it's not owned by race or ethnic group or any particular religion. it's an idea for 200 years that's grown and -- grown and gotten better. we wilalways have a problem as long as we keep that idea in tact of people wanting to come here. that's the good news. the bad news is we have a right and responsibility to control who comes here for the good of our nation and world at large. so the fact that we have so many people that want to come here any way they can come here, if they have to walk through the desert or swim a river, with a kid on their back, they will come. that's a testament to what we've done as a nation for 200 years and all we're telling the world and our neighbors and friends and fellow citizens, we've got to create order out of chaos.

if you're here illegally, it's not a stretch to imagine what life must be like to live in this country illegally, not knowing if the next knock on the door is somebody coming to take you and your family away. it's not much of a stress for a guy from south carolina to understand what it's like to live along the border of arizona and texas and why people go through your back yard across your property at night and do havoc. bob, i think we provided a solution worthy of this nation. about the pathway to citizenship. learn the language, pass a civics exam, pay a fine, work, pass a criminal background check. half of my family would be excluded. this is no easy task. >> the hope is the america i know is ready for immigration

reform. you look at all the polls. is the congress ready to do something that we should have done a long time ago. i really believe we are. if you think the border can be better secured we have an idea for you to consider. if you think there's a shortage of legal labor and the current estimate is too hard to access, we have an idea for you to consider. if you are a union member or just an average american worried about losing your job because of the cheap labor coming into your country, we have an idea to prevent that. if you're in the staves and you worry about what's going to happen to you, we have a solution. you're going to have to learn the right -- to earn the right to be an american. it's fair, it's tough, but it's going to available. i've gotne goal. en this is all said and done, there will not be a third wave of illegal immigration. ronald reagan gave amnesty to 3 million people, trying to do the right thing and the congress failed to follow through.

if we give the 1 million a chance and don't secure our border and provide access to legal labor and do all the things that we should have done 20 years ago, shame on us. this bill fixing the -- forecasts -- fixes the problem. if you got a better idea, bring it along but if you want to kill t. we're going to talk about that. i'm going to read one paragraph. we've always welcomed newcomers to the united states and will continue to do so, but in order to qualify for the honor and privilege of eventual citizenship our laws must be followed. the world depends on america to be strong, economically, militarily, and ethically. the establishment of a stable, just and efficient immigration system only supports those goals. as a nation with the right and responsibility to make our border safe, to estsh clear and just rules for

seeking citizenship, to control the flow of legal immigration, and to eliminate illegal immigration, which in some cases has become a threat to our national security. that paragraph sums up what i'm trying to do. to our fellow citizens, we know congress is broken. this is an effort by four democrats and four republicans to prove to you and the rest of the members of the senate and eventually the house it doesn't have to stay broken. thank you. >>

criminal background check, and if you pass, and get a temporary permit to be in the united states, pay your taxes, learn english, and ultimately have a pathway to becoming a person -- permanent resident. , fulfilling your dream, contributing to the nation. this is a long pathway. it is a tough pathway, but it is achievable. d it creates a real opportunity. there are some that will argue we do not need immigration reform. unless isecure america know who is here to preserve the american trained -- american dream, and if i do not get

millions to register with the government, i will not be able to ascertain that. , which this bill does. if i care about an american worker, and i certainly do, i want to see any american who has the ability to do that first and foremost. the last thing i want is people who are exploited and create downward pressures on wages of all americans. even in this economy where there are some tough opportunities at trying to find a job, there are some jobs or we cannot ganyone o it. if you had some vegetables for breakfast or dinner last night, they were probably picked by an immigrant worker under a hot sun. get chicken for lunch today, it was probably what might hands of an immigrant worker.

if you have a loved one, they're probably being taken care of by the strong hands of an immigrant worker. this is about ensuring that the national economy is further promoted by making sure we do not depress wages and that we have people who pay their taxes and pay their way and at the same time promoting the opportunities for even greater jobs. you cannot be the concierge. you cannot see the chef. you cannot be the restaurant manager and you cannot do some of the fundamental things that those businesses need. finally, we are a nation of immigrants. my parents came to this country

in search of freedom they came to the greatest country on the face of the earth. to have one of their sons to grow up to be a senator is an enormous part of the american experience. we have some the brightest and the best in america that dick durbin was talking about. young men and women who came to this country through no choice of their own, who came here because their parents brought them here when they were children. the only national anthem they know is "the star spangled banner." for them, america is their home. after enormous investment in them in public education and opportunity for them to contribute to america's growth and competitiveness, we turn our backs on them. that is why the effort on the dream act, this is the best one that is ever appeared before the senate. this is a moment to meet one of america's toughest challenges in a way that is smart and secures our borders and at the end of

the day preserves our history as a nation of immigrants. [speaking spanish] [speaking spanh] [speaking spanish]

[speaking spanish] thank you. [applause] >> actually i change my mind. no, i'm kidding. [laughter] >> not again. once is enough. >> grabbing water? [laughter] >> it has been fun. one of the things that makes our nation truly special is that we are a nation of immigrants. i know that has been said many times, but it cannot be said enough.

what distinguishes us from the rest of the world is that we are a collection of the world's best and brightest. not necessarily the most riches of the most powerful, but people who refuse to accept the limitation of a society in which they live. there is only one nation on earth that will do them the chance to do that. millions of people come here for over 200 years. we have built the greatest society and mankind. unfortunately both republicans and democrats have failed to enforce laws. we have many human beings are in violation of immigration laws. we have a problem that needs to be solved. we have a broke will -- broken legal system.

it is complicated and bureaucratic. it does not meet the needs of the 21st century. that is what this is all about. it is about modernizing our legal immigration system it is about helping attract best and brightest talents. it is about ensuring that our culture has a workers that they need. it is ensuring that american businesses not at the expense of american worker, but american businesses have access to temporary or seasonal labor as needed. it is also about enforcing our immigration laws. it is ensuring the federal government does what it is supposed to do in a way that is effective and make sure we do not have this problem again. that federal government has to secure its borders. we have set up a universal e- verify system to ensure that american worker is not disadvantage and to ensure that

these magnets of illegal employment is not drawing a legal people here in the future. we have the creation of the entrance/exit system. 40% of the illegal immigration problem -- we have to dealith the y millions of people living in this country today in violation of our immigration laws. yes, they did violate our immigration laws. they do not have a legal right to be here. but we are dealing with this not because we legally have to, but because it is our national interest as a nation. it is not good to have the people living in the shadows. number two, we are dealing with this issue because this is who we are. we are the most compassionate nation on earth. we welcome people from all over the world for over 200 years. in a way that other countries rejected because they were scared. not us. we embraced it. each of us are direct descendents of immigrants. we have created the single

greatest society mankind has ever known. we are the descendents of the tired, the poor, the huddled masses. i guess at the end i would say that this is our common heritage. it is tragic that a nation of immigrants remains divided on the issue of immigration. this must become our strength. i believe we can make that happen. one final point to my fellow americans who share my commitment to limited government anfree eerprisand who helped elect me in 2010 -- i would remind them that america is a nation of immigrants. both parties have failed to enforce the law and as a result we have millions who are here against our immigration laws. we will not deport them. let's secure the borders. they will pay a fine and start paying taxes. we all wish we didn't have this problem, but we do. ,eaving things to way they are

that is the real amnesty. [speaking spanish] [speaking spanish] thank you. [applause] >> i thought i might go last. it would allow me to say i agree with everything that was said. i thk my colleags up here for showing me how the senate can work. it will take more effort to get

this bill passed. this bill is incredibly important to people in my state. i think lindsey graham named it well when he called the schumer- mccain. the leadership of those two gentlemen in this process has been outstanding. it was everything i wished i could see since i have been here. when this bill is passed, it it will be a reaffirmation of two incredibly american ideas. the idea we are committed to the rule of law and the idea that we are a nation of immigrants. i would argue that it is those two ideas working together that decade after decade has enabled every generation of americans to invent the future. it is our time in the 21st century to decide whether we are still up to that task, whether we can continue to invent the future not just here, but the entire world.

s of tential ourselves to thesei part of moving us forward. i want to thank the people in colorado who told me on how broken immigration system is effect in their lives and their works. the cattle ranchers on the eastern point. the people working in the high- tech field. the people who are the dreamers when i was superintendent of the denver public schools. each one of them is struggling to get ahead in this economy. each one of them feels burdened by a broken immigration system that is not working well. they are getting up every single day i'm working with whomever it is, neighbors they do not like very much to drive their business forward and to drive their family forward. the least they can expect the man i states congress is that

level of effort. it will take that level of effort to get this passed. the leadership that senator schumer's and senator mccain have shown will guide us through to the very end. thank you. [applause] i wanted to say that in spanish. [laughter] >> i'm the new guy here. i arrived from the house. i was visiting some old colleagues. one of them said, how's the senate? who are you hanging out with? insaid, chuck schumer and di atnever thought i would say this has been a great

experience. i do not know but the bill will be called in the end. this has been a wonderful process. i'm new to the senate, but i'm not new to the issue. we have worked in this issue in experience. the house for a number of years. i grew up in a farm on a ranch in arizona, working alongside migrant workers. many were undocumented. i saw what they went through and and saw how hard they worked. this is always been a personal issue to make sure that they can have a process and an opportunity to do what we allow them to do here. for the citizens of arizona worried about the border, and arizona has wanted a secure border for a long time. this is a good bill. the border security provisions are sound and strong. we will make sure that they remain in the bill. to pay tribute to our staff.

this was a very diul [applause] translating and confusing messages -- john says the reward en.l be in hell.-- heav i appreciate this legislation. we look for to seeing it through. thank you. [applause] >> we will take a few questions.

>> ram legislation for background checks, it seems like it might have bipartisan support. i'm curious, what will you do to ensure that the same thing does not happen with your immigration legislation? >> i think we have a very strong foundation. we did not just get together oa. we hen months and struggling through these issues and each getting to know each other. second, i think i can speak -- that the majority in both caucuses want to get this done. are there people at the extreme sides of both caucuses? i believe that this is the you -- and ours to lose. he i think we have a great product here. it is really strong. i think we have a great unity

among ourselves that will keep this a going through. i do not think it will be like gun control. i think the product that we are starting out with has broader support on a broader basis than guns did both in the senate and in the country. >> can i mention one compelling reason? when you look at the rep presentation of business, labor, religious community, the hispanic community, across the board, this is a coalition i never thought i would be standing with. but let me say thankal of our activists. this is why wccee it is because of this broad base of dedicated support for this legislation. >> they are the winds beneath our wings. >> can you tell us i do justify allowing millions of workers in the workplace when we have a high unemployment rate?

>> we will only have immigrants come in when unemployment is in each case, anyone that wants to bring any new worker first, has to to look for and advertise for an american worker. right here. >> can you give us an idea of where you anticipate the biggest challenge is in terms of selling this to your fellow colleagues? will it be border security? >> there are some things that each person will not like. when you put it all together, a vast majority of people across and ideological spectrum, the' more to like than not to like.at iwht

it done.what successful ithlve the problem on the product of our hard work that has greeted with the backing of the people behind us. >> senator mccain, is there any particular element of this bill that you think is worth to be modified that would contribute to it falling apart? i know you said there are a lot of good things in the bill, but any particular thing where you would draw the line as a group and it would fall apart? >> as i said in my opening remarks, we are committed to good changes in the bill. this is not a final product. we are also committed to vote against amendments or proposals or changes that would kill the bill. there is a difference there.

we're not saying it is a perfect piece of legislation. we think it can be improved upon. we also know proponents will be proposing amendments that if passed could collapse this very fragile coalition that we have been able to achieve. i would also like to point out that depending on how you ask the question, 70%-80% of of the people believe that these individuals should be given a to citizenship as long as they pay a fine and pay taxes and t in line behind everyone else. they believe that is fair. that is one of the fundamental steps i think will help convince more conservative friends. >> senator mccain, how is the bill language compared to the mccain-kennedy bill, and how

much will the realizations of the republicans contribute to a change in the bill after the election? >> i think most republicans -- many more republicans than the last time are aware as marco and bob pointed out graphically that the status quo is not acceptable. the status quo is not acceptable. if you believe that, then you're willing to make compromises that may not fit your exact land our proposal for immigration reform. that is why it is important that the eight of us, there are various backgrounds and various viewpoints. that is why we have come together. republicans have got to compete for the hispanic voter.

w nd i think my legislation in republican friends agree with me does not get a single vote from the hispanic community, but what doeonevwher c battle of ideas. we think wn with -- compete inf ideas. we think we win. [laughter] let me just say, but right now, a little straight talk, we are not competitive because this issue has got to be resolved in the minds of our citizens who feel this is a vitally important issue that needs to be resolved. when i was born, how many workers were there for every social security retirees in this country that though there were 16. how many are there today? 3. how many or though be in 20

years? 2. where did the workers come from. 10,000 baby boomers are retiring a day. one day that will be john read his mother is 101. everyone is living longer. that is the good news. if we do not reform medicare and medicaid, we are on to become greece. they are the drivers of the debt and we will find a way to do that. if you do not have a legal emigration system to supplement a declining population, you are committing economic suicide. to bring people in from all over the world, not just the people who live next door is key. bring them in on your terms, not theirs. and they're based immigration system that wille a companion -- faly component. toho w we do n n gaimmigration, you're crazy. we decatio we needt ane brightest and sometimes the best and brightest is the guy who

starts as the janitor. so i arely intdea this ameca. te me how it costs more to have people paid under the table vi fear, running around the country and undocumented versus having them in a system where they get paid over the counter, taxes are taken out, they get no benefits for 10 years. that makes no sense. the only way america loses is to do nothing. and to those people who believe that we don't need legal immigration in the future, you are in denial about the demographics. to those who say it costs more to take people out of the shadows of them in legal status where they pay taxes, you have certainly lost me. it makes no sense. >> for those who would like an english translation of senator grandpa's remarks, i would be glad to provide it. -- senator lindsey graham's

remarks, i would be glad to provide it. cost, money.out some members were saying [indiscernible] the is your estimation on cost? >> there are no gimmicks at all in this bill. one of our principles from the get go, which has been and is and will be and will continue to be that this bill will be revenue-neutral. there are costs in the bill, securing the border, setting up the e-verify system, makings for the exit/entry system works, but we also have income rids t ben a path to citizenship will s thatant to bring in workers will pay. in fact, one never knows how the -- we don't know how they will score it, but our estimates

are this bill will bring in a surplus. if for some reason cbo moves away from that, we will work for introduction of the bill to make sure it is revenue-neutral. it is one of our bottom lines. sorry, deficit-neutral. thank you, everybody. [applause] >> and it update on the manhunt for the suspect in the boston marathon bombings, overnight his brother was killed, also in mit officer was killed in a shootout. the younger brother is on the loose. and lockdown in the boston area. they were last seen in the water to an area just outside boston. and in his cover the short while ago, the police said the boston area continues on lockdown as they go house to house. they also plan -- a controlled explosion at a house in

cambridge, massachusetts, some timeay. amtrak is suspending service between new york and boston. senior democrat associated press as on the house intelligence committeeay the to the st ng suspects had before they confronted police., there was a briefing earlier today. across our networks, we will keep you posted with the latest news and updates. we continue in about an hour in 10 minutes we will take you live to the state department. john kerry, whose brief this morning at the white house on the boston investigation, will be delivering and presenting the human rights report, the annual report on human rights practices in countries around the world live at 2:15 eastern here on c- span. up next, we go back to the issue of immigration. we shared everything with you yesterday with the so-called gang of eight and a bipartisan legislation.

up next, jeff sessions and david vitter. this is about 25 minutes. >> all right. it is so good to be with you. this is an important event today, i think. i think all of you for attending. and those who are here to speak in share with you today from senator ve w with us and a little bit. thank you for your knowledge and expertise on these issues. enforcing the law in the united states of any kind is tough. we provide rights and privileges

to people that come in contact with law enforcement. just a few loopholes in the procedure can make it virtually impossible to effectively do what they are asked to do. as these officers will tell you on this administration than aggressively defied federal law. we can have no confidence and promises of future law enforcement until the current constitutional rule of law is up help. like in 2007, the special interests were brought in. they have been engaged behind closed doors. they helped write a bill while the law first and officers, the ones giving the duty to make sure the law is complied with, have been shut out as has been the public interest. and the interest of working americans, in my view. is amnestybill before enforcement. it is a promise ofnforcement read the promises of enforme

in the future appeared to be even weaker than they were in 2007. today the bill passes, it illegal immigrants will have the presumption of amnesty and all secretary napolitano has to do is submit a vague plan in six months that may never get implemented. the bill brought in mr. provisions include even those who oppose a public safety threat as our officers will explain. no border fence requirement is in this bill. it is not a requirement in the bill. you have not gotten the correct story on this issue. you will hear alarming facts straight from the stores. no immigration bill should ever pass congress that the law first and officers on the ground tell us will not work or cannot be enforced. senator vitter agreed to huddie. if you would like to share of quick marks and we will go straight to the cinnamon.

-- go straight to these gentlemen. >> i'm very honored to join jeff and the members of the house and in particular the law enforcement leaders who are here. our message is really simple and straightforward and basic, but importt we are very concernedl e fundamentallywed mol from the past. it is in immediate amnesty with promises of enforcem ted that model before. ai miserably before. we all want to solve this prle n contie it, not t, certainly not grow it. and so we are fundamentally concerned in immediate amnesty with promises of enforcement grows the problem. that is what happened in 1986. that was the model in the 1986 reform. the promise then was, we will do this once, solve the problem, and never have to look back.

we did not solve the problem. we did not continue the problem, we quadrupled the problem. what was 3 million illegal aliens than was 11 million or 12 million today. let me be clear. when i say immediate amnesty, that is because almost all of the illegals we're talking about at the front end to get a new legal status. that happens before any enforcement is proved out, before anything is measured, before anything is assured. and the final model has failed in the past. we are concerned it would fail again. thank you to all of these law- enforcement leaders, in particular, who are fighting a fight on the ground. >> thank you, david. the president of the ice association who has bn dealing with these issues for some time, a former marine, someo have chris, share your thoughts.

>> thank you. almost one month ago we asked for a meeting with the game that day to discuss on for some concerns. they told us they were not taking meetings. but they were meeting all along with the special interests and pro amnesty interests. finally, after public pressure group i got a late monday night meeting with senator rubio the day before this almost 1000-page bill was introduced. i raised by many public safety concerns and pleaded with them not to drop the bill until these public safety concerns from law enforcement were addressed. they dropped it anyway. this bill will put the public safety at risk without doubt. it failed on the interior enforcement, it's amnesty first, enforcement perhaps never. immigration agents have filed a lawsuit against dhs secretary

janet napolitano and the eyes director because both have refused to enforce the immigration laws enacted by congress. dhs and ice knowingly manipulate, data, with the intent of misleading the public with regard to the enforcement of illegal immigration in our country. ice claims it has deported more illegal aliens than any time in history this -- is balls butice clans its efforts have led to -- claims that the borders are more securis false. at an alarming rate,ice arrests and deportation numbers have plummeted since 2008. clear evidence that interior enforcement has, in large part, been shut down during the last four years in an attempt to conceal their planning arrest and deportation statistics,

massive numbers of border patrol apprehensions are being transferred to i.c.e. to boost their statistical data. the immigrant rights groups now work with i.c.e. and dhs and dick take a long first of policies within these agencies, not the united states congress. under the obama administration, immigration agents can no longer arrest those who violate u.s. immigration law. immigration agents cannot arrest an individual for entering the u.s. illegally. we cannot arrest someone who over stays a visa. immigration agents are prohibited from enforcing laws regarding fraudulent documents and a dandy that by illegal aliens. agents are forced to apply the dream act, not to children in schools, but to adult inmates in jails. mmiething criminals back in nation, criminals who have

insulted our officers, and who prey on children. at the same time, i.c.e. officers are punished and threatened by dhs and i.c.e. leadership, threatened with the loss of their jobs simply because they attempt to enforce the nation's immigration laws and provide for public safety. chosen togang 8 has ignore law enforcement officers, have a question i would like to ask them publicly. schumer, dickhuck durbin, john mccain, patrick leahy, lindsey graham, roark menendez, jeff blake, michael bennett's cut as united states senators, the representatives of the people, where have you been for the last four years? what have you done to prevent

political appointees at i.c.e. and dhs from ignoring the laws of congress? what have you done to stop the same political appointees from manipulating arrest that and misleading the american public and members of congress? what have you done to prevent cminals from being released back into american communities by the thousands? what have you done to protect america's law enforcement officersow not only place their lives at risk to enforce our nation's laws, but their careers as well as they struggle against political appointees who ordered them not to enforce the law and order them to place the public at risk? , you have done nothing. you sat on their hands and watch it happen for four years. it should come as no surprise that you have done nothing in the gang of 8's proposed new legislation to address any of these problems.

gentleman, we have lost right now that would be effective if we had senators like you that would act with integrity and support on first and officers in our efforts to provide for public safety. i strongly urge americans to disregard the talking points of the gang of 8 and wait for the specific details of this legislation to become known. unfortunately, i do not believe the gang of 8 is a group that we can entrust with a matter so important to safety of american communities and the security of our nation. thank you. thehank you, chris bridge ne speaker, sheriff page -- thank you, chris. the next speaker, sheriff page. >> good afternoon. thank you for allowing me to be here.

i'm a sheriff and rockingham, north carolina with the national sheriffs' association and vice chair of the border security and immigration committee. myerve 90,000 people in county and represent them and come to washington to express concerns and north carolina but also as a national share rep. when we enact legislation in north carolina and it deals with public safety, we have input -- we should have input from law enforcement, those enforcing the laws. here in congress, our lawmakers, i would expect nothing different. for them to invite and encourage us to be part of the debate, the discussion because after all, we will be enforcing these laws. in the united states, our borders are not secure. as a sheriff and north carolina who must travel to the border more than once and seen it for myself and work with officials down there, i cannot understand

why there are representatives in washington cannot figure it out. it is not secure. when drug cartels and up in rockingham county with weapons, of drugs, and money and are housed in our county, that concerns me. i am also a border sheriff. secure our borders. homelanduregins at home. that is a message to give the from the national sheriffs association. we must secure our borders. no. 2, amnesty is amnesty. call it what you want to call it. but the national sheriffs' association statement says we will not accept all-out amnesty. there is a process called the rule of law. i'm a 32-year veteran of law enforcement and we need to give back to the rules of law. i think our senators for helping us to do the right thing, but i would encourage the senators group of eight to engage and

allow us to have opportunity to have input on this legislation that will affect the homeland security of this nation and on this most important issue. thank you and appreciate and i need to speak before congress. >> the next speaker, todd harrison, new mexico. >> thank you comment gentleman. my name is todd garrison from new mexico. i live on the border and have so for about 50 years now. i and the sheriff there for the past eight years and our borders are not secure. i am currently the chair of the southwest border sheriff's coalition, a represeion the shares from california, arizona, new mexico, and texas. we have offered our services on a number of occasions to come down here and discuss this issue being that we live on the border and deal with these issues every day, we feel like we have

knowledge of that. with the current bill that has to keepsed, it is hard trusting in our federal government on these issues, and really frustrating. we are public servants. we have been elected to office to serve the public and our concern a public safety -- is concern a public safety for our cities, counties, and country. i know some of the federal officers have spoken from i.c.e., asking we be allowed to do our jobs, and i ask that we allow the federal government officers on the ground to protect our borders. if we let them do their jobs with all laws already in place, i think we can secure this border and move ahead with the problem at hand, which is immigration reform. i agree there are problems there, but we have to deal with it in that order. thank you very much.

the next picture, sheriff ristol county, massachusetts. >> thank you for your leadership on this issue, senator sessions consisting law-enforcement be included in this policy that will come along at some point here in the united states. there are 5 million people waiting behind the borders around the world, respecting a loss of the u.s., waiting their turn to begin a pathway to citizenship. we currently have nearly 12 million people since 1980 sex who have ignored, disrespected the loss -- 1986 to have ignored, this respected the law. i believe that americans and all immigrants who reside in the u.s. legally want an immigration

policy that is fundamentally fair that rewards citizenship based on the premise of following the rules, as the previous speakers have said. most people that emigrate to the u.s. do so to live in democracy that affords them the opportunity of self- determination, freedom to pursue a better life, economically, socially, and otherwise. but these freedoms are made possible bauve laws to protect my christie. democracy. in massachusetts, we have seen an influx of illegals. illegal immigrants are creating public health hazards, public onety concerns, living in room apartment with three families taking mattresses off the streets that are infested with bedbugs, filling our

emergency rooms for lack of preventive care, and costing the taxpayers millions and millions of dollars. hasproposal the gang of 8 put forth -- and i want to commend them for at least, at least seriously beginning the conversation about immigration .eform, albeit far too short what is happening here, as the previous speakers have said, we are effectively allowing the super bowl to be played in the stadium where three-quarters of the entrances to the stadium have no ticket takers and a security to check people in. so people wander into the game a year after year after year. finally, after a period of time, since they have been allowed to do so, we are going to allow them to become season-ticket

holders. ultimately, we ought not solve the problem because those gates continue to be unsecured. that is really what we're talking about with regards to border control. we must secure our borders before we can begin to implement the other parts of this legislation. it is absolutely critical to us to be able to preserve public safety and protect the loss of the united states. let me end by saying, i can assure you not anybody standing behind this podium is anti- immigrant. all of us have ancestors who emigrated to this country. my father emigrated directly from the country of england, raised 13 children, and did it the right way. if we allow this amnesty to move forward, and suggest somehow the laws don't matter, then we effectively begin to erode our democracy further and creates the incredible obstacles for all of us in law enforcement to be

able to do our jobs just protect the constitution and the people of the united states. then closing, i am asking gang of 82 as theisto standing here today are asking, -- do as the legislators standing here today are asking, law effectively to protect the people of the u.s. and allo legitimate immigration for this country, then you must include all the parties involved, and particularly looking at law- enforcement up front. thank you again, senator sessions. >> thank you. mayor hazleton, pennsylvania. back in 2006, i created and pass the first lot of its kind in the country dealing with illegal immigration. is 2,000 miles away

from the n souer rder not a place where you would anticipate having a problem with illegal immigration, but we did. we saw our population continue to grow -- in fact, it grew by 50% in five years, but our tax revenue remained the same. hadmember one time we arrested someone for selling cocaine on a playground. the person arrested was in the country illegally and took our detectives five hours to determine who he was. he had five social security cards. illegal immigration does not only affect people on the thehern border 40% o people in the country illegally did not cross the border. they camese of which then expired and they don't go home. which then on a visa

expired and they don't go home read it is impossible for law- enforcement to determine who they are talking to, to determine summons path. for a minimal amount of money, you can get an entirely new and in any -- dientity. we of immigration laws for two reasons. one, protect national security and two, to protect american jobs. the proposal of the senate's gang of 8 violates both of those principles. it will make our borders less secure and jobs harder to find at a time when 22 million americans cannot find work. by offering a pathway to citizenship, but offering amnesty -- as i like to call it, a temporary amnesty indefinitely -- we have encouraged millions more to rush to the u.s.

illegally to benefit from this proposal. in fact, just last week border patrol chief michael fisher testified in a senate hearing thaty aladarng an increase inder crosng d said in part it is due to the proposed amnesty for illegal aliens. we should be doing one thing right now, and that is securing our borders. nothing more. we should not be talking about anything else. we have good reason to make our borders are secure so what happened in 1986 won't happen again. and to put it in very simple terms, without border security first, it is like replacing your car at home when you still have a hole in the roof. thank you. >> on your screen is a picture brothers wanted by

the fbi in connection to the boston marathon bombings. his brother, long shot overnight in a confrontation with police. the boston please continue to be in lock down as police search -- the boston area continues to be in lock down as police search for the suspect. the report the fbi searching the homes of their sisters in both boston area and the northern new jersey area, according to the associated press. we will keep you posted with updates and briefings as warranted on the c-span network. in about 45 minutes we will take you live to the state to permit secretary of state john kerry of presenting the annual human- rights report of countries around the world live at 2:15. earlier today, the senate judiciary committee met to consider the new proposed legislation by the so-called bipartisan gang of 8 on immigration. secretary janet napolitano was to appear but did not testify

due to the fact she was at the white house for a briefing, and update on the boston marathon investigation. we will show you as much of the hearing we can until secretary john kerry's comments at 2:15. please i apologize for the delay. as you know there is a great deal going on in massachusetts. i hope everybody can understand why secretary napolitano onot be here. we will se he .estimony

she was saying how proud we are of the way law enforcement has responded. i am distressed to hear another officer been killed and another critically wounded, just as we are for all people to work injured or killed during the marathon. least one person who .uns marathons in the audience it should have been a joyous marathons' arese for spectators and participants.

the bipartisan proposal we have to establish a path of citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants in thiet backlogs and the current immigration system. agricultural workers are essential part of our community and work so hard to provide our nation's food supplies, make some important changes to the pieces used by dairy farmers, the tourism industry, immigrants and investments. it addresses the needs of our

law enforcement community, requires the help of victims of domestic violence, some of them offered to come forward because of their status. the united states remains the begin to the world as it was to my paternal grandparents and paternal great-grandparent's. i appreciate the fact that we have four members of this committee who has worked with others in forming a bipartisan consensus. >> thank you to the centers for that. senator feinstein has taught me more about immigration then i

would never learned otherwise. sehe traders.g i did not want people moving out of the shadows to be stuck in some other class, just as we should not halt dreamers who arrive here as children. i am disappointed we are not treating all families equally. i agree we have to carry the discrimination that ks and family -- gays and lesbians families face. these are all things we can discuss through market. i cannot help but question whether spending billions more between the united states and mexico is the best use of our

taxpayer dollars. i do know that each one of us can write what we want and each one of us may have a different bill. very difficult by all involved. i mentioned senator schumer, determine, but also senator feinstein and senator mccain workhem. it to thel bring public. this is the fourth time -- this is the fourth immigration we have had this year. secretarynd time for the public, to come in for the committee. give the public

an opportunity to learn about it. ,ertainly every one of us unless you want to say we do not know how to read, every one of us will have plenty of time to analyze this bill before we actually start marking up in may. immigration has been an ongoing source of spirit. youngsters that brought this country, they get a better life. our nation continues to benefit from immigrantsithen my parents came here. -- impose theose fundamental values of family. in vermont -- student exchange, economic

development to the regional tourism, and that wonderful country of canada. foreign and into cultural workers support our farmers and growers. many will become a part of families and moving to the fabric of the community. the discomfort -- the dysfunction in the system affects all of us. it is our opportunity to do it. we have to act. we can talk about it but eventually we have to vote. millions of americans depend upon us. side we understand why the secretary cannot be here and we feel she is doing exactly what she should be doing. opportunity,an when things settle down, to question her.

portungration, particularly in lit of all that is happening in massachusetts right now and over the last week. i know the people of bton and watertown are in everyone's thoughts this morning. we are here trying to understand why these events have occurred. it is hard to understand that eir pele in this world that wanted to americans are. this is an opportunity to focus on the issues at hand and the importance of remaining vigilant and securing our homeland. we appreciate 30 years ago today this committee held a hearing to discuss the immigration reform control act read the author of that bill opened the meeting by presenting the bill and stating its purpose. to control illegal

immigration in the united states and to control illegal -- gration he further stated, "the first duty of a sovereign nation is to control its borders. we do not do that." i suppose that is still the situation today. the bill we debated that they would provide legalization of millions of pplady in the united states. on that day senator simpson stated further we are attempting to ensure that this is a one time only program. the bill we are considering today, according to the bipartisan group of eight senators who crafted it, will ensure that this is a successful permanent reform to our immigration system that will not be revisited. passed and we are

saying the same thing, facing the same problems. we are proposing the same remedies and asking the american people to trust that we will get serious about enforcing our immigration laws. so let me be clear, i have to applaud like other people have to the group of eight senators for their commitment to reforming our broken immigration system. time will tell if this bill solves that problem the way that their statement to ensure that this is a successful, permanent reform to our immigration system so that we will not have to revisit it. debate the border security economic opportunity and immigration monterey's asian samei will be asking the questions as to whether this when that bill passed thought

in 1986 that is what they did. we did everything in good faith, shutting off the make it to bring people to this country but making it illegal to hire undocumented people for the first time. but we did not look far enough ahead and we did not do it right as we all know now. i made it clear that this bill needs to go through the committee process, and it will. i have argued that this bill must open the opened amendments during consideration in committee on the floor. we have been told it will. every member of the senate must have an opportunity to read, analyze, and improve the bill, and the schedule will permit -- will permit that. we are off to a six tough start. -- to a tough start. it is just under 900 pages. there are some new concepts, most members on the staff have not met -- have not read the

bill. --ely we should be avoiding we have been assured we will. before the judiciary committee met on that day, the subcommittee on immigration health reported the ll to the full committee. year -- the year before that the committee held 16 hearings and five consultations. prior to the markup of the same bill the committee had 100,000 -- had 100 hearings. we have experts who nd heard on this bill. we need to understand how changes in our visa program will affect businesses in american workers. we need to know how new concepts will be put into practice. and most importantly we need to hear from the congressional budget office about the impact will have on the taxpayers. we have to get it right. we thought we got it right,

otherwise the goals will not be met. given the events of this week it is important for us to understand the gaps and loopholes in our immigration system. while we do not yet know the immigration status of people who have terrorized the committees in massachusetts, when we find out it will help shed light on the weaknesses in our system. individual event authority and how can we beef up security checks on people who wish to enter the united states? how do we ensure that people who wish to do is harm are not eligible for benefits under the immigration laws, including this new billefore us. we have a long road ahead of us to pass legislation reform or immigration system. we cannot tolerate anything less than a transparent and deliberate process to improve we bill because we thought redoing that exactly in 1986 but we screwed up and we cannot

afford to screw up again. thank you. we're going to make be voting on this. it will be strained on our website and i understand from our i.t. people and all people -- hing please go ahead. is your microphone on? >> thank you. -- ndicated youth commission on civil rights was established pursuant to

1937 civil rights act. examanners related to melete production and racial discrimination. because of racial discrimination often implicate matters pertaining to national origin the commission over the years has recently conducted hearings on aspects of immigration including illegal immigration. the most recent such hearing occurred dealing with the specific issue of the effect of illegal immigration on the weage and employment levels of specific americans. illegal immigration has a negative effect on wage levels of specifically black americans. >> i am having a hard time hearing. if you could be a little closer. >> it is important to keep in mind that the witnesses at the hearing were experts on immigration that spanned theological spectrum.

policy,differences in everyone would agree that illegal immigration has a monster to a negative effect on employment opportunities and wage levels. thisvidence as to why affects black americans it's basic. the artist proportionately more likely to have only a white -- ha a high-school the palma. they're disproportionately likely to have low levels of educational achievement and these two groups compete against one another in the skilled -- in the low skill libor market. that competition is most fears in those areas of the economy of four blacks have to start in and blacks were destroyed

in -- a as shown by a professor of industrial relations, it is not because they are unwilling to work it is because they are unloaded big the are unwilling to work of the cut-rate wages and substandard benefits tendered to legal benefit -- tended to illegal immigrants. much of the competition is concentrated in the metropolitan areas such as new york, los angeles, chicago, and rural areas in south east states such as north carolina and virginia. the impact of illegal pecigration on those workers is everen today's stagnant economy. the commission conducted the investigation originally, the

unemployment rate for blacks with a high school diploma is 20%. to date is 24 percent -- today it is 24.69. that shows we have low skilled .aborers of theh shows that 40% 18% decline is attributable to illegal immigration. that is hundreds of thousands of blacks without jobs and translates to 100 of thousands of campaign actions that do not support their families on their own time. the evidence also indicated that in addition to depressing and plugged levels immigration drove studies at the federal bank of atlanta shows that illegalin -- a spike in

immigration led to a decrease. it was $1520. for doctors and lawyers that may not be a whole lot. an extension of e payroll tax cut, $80 peramils. recent history shows that grant of l status for the increase is the influx of illegal immigrants. that for their forces out low- skilled laborers and thereby depressing the wage and employment levels of those americans. thatdition to that necessarily leads to more americans depending on the need for government.

it is respected that the agent that before federal government grant's federal's average -- federal status -- the evidence before the commission is that grant of sub status is not without a substantial cost to the american worker. thank you. >> a full statement will be made part of the record. he was formerly the director of the congressional budget office under george w. bush in 2003 to 2005. that is when we first met. >> that is correct. >> it is good to have you here. >> thank you. it is a privilege to be here

today. i have itd written recordfor th. let me briefly make three points and then i look for to answering your question. the first point is simply that the immigration reform bill be there are important security benefits. at a score immigration represents an economic policy opportunity. it is an opportunity for the united states to dictate the evolution of its future population. as i emphasized in my testimony, in the absence of immigration low fertility rates means the u.s. population declines. the future of growth is determined by immigration choices. it will have strong influences on the of the norse ship and small business creation. the evidence is that new immigrants work more, they have

small businesses at a higher rate. to increased productivity growth in the u.s. .conomy i have done some estimates that perhaps you could have nearly a full percentage point faster growth over 10 years. associated with that is something every member of this committee would be que plead to see, and that is last budgetary in pressure. that is clearly a benefit that we ought to think about when we think about immigration reform and not rely on those efforts which ignore economic growth. i think the u.s. is out of step with its economic competitors.

10% is for economic purposes. this bill makes important changes to the ps assist them. they represent a step toward its industrialized countries. a legitimate concern is what will happen to the federal budget. i think a good way to think about the budgetary implications is to start with the last piece of comprehensive immigration reform legislation that congress looked at in 2007. indicated if you look at the balance between spending and revenues it would increase steps by about $18 billion. $18 billion does not sound like a lot right now in the context of trillion dollar debt year after year. i think there are two things to remember about that billion. of the thingshawe

po objectives, border security and verify systems, there has been spending on that at about half of what cbs needs it -- of what the heck cbo needs. the second thing has been that cbo did not use dynamic soaring. that would chagne the impacts. the last piece of what has horened is since that sc the president signed the affordable care at. there's a bipartisan commitment that those that will become a producer provisional immigrants, those who are here illegally, would not be eligible for benefits. certainly not for 10 years, realistically not for 15. there will be a budgetary impact

over the horizon. thiis congress should ken eye . d happy dcuss with yoimpact of this bill in that regard. i think the primary objective should be that when the many policy makers to put on the table economics to not to shuffled. this is an opportunity for us to improve on our growth record, which has not been good. i look for to chants -- to the chance to answer the questions you may have about that. wage,u hear about low- people may be hurt by this. the of places where there are a large number of immigrants undocumented that companies will show up and say we are clinton pay you a flat rate for working

today, you cannot complain about it. two people undercut people hired at minimum wage by doing it legally? >> think the impact of immigration on lower skilled employment rages is an issue. i am glad it is aise. illegal immigrants in the nine states, if you look at the bill there are two features that are important to think about. it would put those people on level legal playing field with u.s. workers, same workplace protections and weight loss, all of that dynamics considerably. cut offintended to future illegal immigration. order security, the-verify,

they are all designed to do that. that change is what every think may be the prevailing wisdom on that. >> i want to make sure that people understand. there is good reason to believe that immigration raises the wages of american workers, that there are compliments to american workers. i would emphasize two things. if we are worried about the ability of low-skilled americans earning a minimum wage we should fix the those skill problem. that is the problem. think the competition begins with somebody arise in the united states you are mistaken. >> you mention the immigration policy is economic policy. you talked about the contra been a real leader -- the auction and a real leader -- the

entrepeneurial vigor. highest25% of our scoring companies between 1990 an2005, inclu intel, , they apple, the day appoint thousands of people here in the united states. they are greek a. they are ben by immigrants. that is something which should be thinking about. >> i would hope so. the evidence is quite clear on the capacity of immigration. i havehe time remaining, you released this analysis to quell the immigration reform. it can boost the american economy by as much as 1% every year. or reduce the deficit by as much

as support for a trillion dollars. -- as much as 1.5 trillion dollars. do you want to elaborate on that? >> i could say a couple of things. >> economic growth comes from growth in people and their growth and activity. immigration controls both sides of the labor force anson's immigrants tend to work more you get labor force growth. as you mentioned the of to give small businesses and doctors that raise productivity of those workers. and their benefits to the overall economic growth, thus raising productivity for the -- productivity.

that -- i did not taylor that estimate to 2013, 2014, 2015. this bill will take some time to pass and commence. you want to think of that as, what will the next 10 years look like? >> your testimony of since immigration. some are concerned by the cause. not 2007 any more. it is important to consider what has happened since then to get a sense of how the effects may have changed. can you elaborate on that? >> i think the key spending aspects changed. the policy objectors on the discretionary side, there has been expenditure on the systems.

not all of this needs to be done